u/rickkyyyyyyyyy

First, I think we need to distinguish between Arab and Arab ,Semitic groups. This is still debated among historians, especially when discussing the difference between people who speak Arabic and people who identify with or have adopted Arab culture. This post isn't meant to answer who is "really Arab" or define Arab identity.

In 1916, following the Sykes–Picot Agreement, the foundations of many of the modern borders of the Arab world began to take shape. This was followed by resistance against colonial occupation, and between roughly 1922 and 1970, most Arab countries gained independence.

What interests me is how different people's relationship with these borders was compared with today.

People obviously knew geographical regions and cities. They knew places such as مكة, القدس, فاس, مراكش, دمشق, بغداد, Egypt, al-Sham (الشام), and the Maghreb (المغرب). But the modern nation-state wasn't necessarily the main framework through which everyone understood their identity.

Someone could identify primarily with their tribe, family, city, or region while also seeing themselves as part of a broader Arab world. The existence of a border on a map didn't automatically erase older social and family connections.

You can still see remnants of this today. There are families with connections across the Morocco–Algeria border, between Gaza and Egypt, between Saudi Arabia and Jordan, and in many other places. I'm not saying borders didn't exist or that everyone moved freely without passports. Rather, the social meaning of those borders was different, especially for older generations.

This was also reflected in the political landscape of the time.

🇪🇬 Gamal Abdel Nasser — arguably the most influential symbol of pan-Arab nationalism.

🇸🇦 King Faisal — a major conservative and Islamic leader who represented an alternative to Nasserist revolutionary politics.

🇲🇦 Hassan II — a conservative monarch who opposed Nasserist and revolutionary politics.

🇩🇿 Ahmed Ben Bella / Houari Boumédiène — important revolutionary and anti-colonial figures.

🇹🇳 Habib Bourguiba — a secular and relatively pro-Western Arab leader.

Despite their huge political differences, Arab identity itself wasn't necessarily treated as incompatible with the existence of individual states.

Then came the Arab Spring.

One uprising in Tunisia unexpectedly spread across much of the Arab world. Egypt, Libya, Syria, Yemen, Bahrain and other countries experienced mass protests, while even Saudi Arabia saw calls for greater rights and political reform.

This seems to have changed how many governments viewed the potential political power of Arab solidarity.

Before the Arab Spring, Arabism could coexist with state nationalism. After 2011, governments had a much stronger incentive to emphasize the individual nation-state as the primary political community.

This is where I think we see the growth of a different form of nationalism across parts of the Arab world.

Governments and media increasingly emphasized each country's distinct history, pre-Islamic civilizations, heritage, national symbols, security, economic development and future prosperity. You began seeing messages along the lines of: our country's stability, our country's security, our country's development and our country's future.

But interestingly, Arabism was necessarily abandoned for security reasons.

The message became something like: we are a Moroccan/Egyptian/Saudi/Algerian/etc., and our national identity comes first and last .

So I think Arab nationalism is simply is sided today, because it's no longer fit the agenda.

I'm curious what people think about this interpretation, especially those from different Arab countries. Is the rise of stronger national identities after the Arab Spring actually connected to governments becoming more wary of pan-Arabism, or am I overstating the connection?

​

Arab politics today feels like a dark place full of lies, treason, backstabbing, and pure geopolitical opportunism from all Arab state with no exceptions

It feels like no Arab country truly trusts another. Instead, governments align themselves with whichever outside power can offer them something: loans, weapons, military protection, diplomatic backing, help against internal opponents, or support in regional disputes. And in exchange, they are willing to make almost any concession.

Egypt has helped maintain the siege around Gaza for years. Morocco has allowed ships carrying weapons to dock at its ports while receiving Western support over the Sahara dispute. Saudi Arabia has allowed the US and Israel access to its bases and airspace while military operations are carried out across the region. The UAE has been supporting armed groups in Sudan while deepening its security and technological ties with Israel. Jordan has maintained a land bridge through which Israeli trucks can move supplies.

Israel could hardly have dreamed of a more sweater regional environment: Arab governments providing, in one form or another, logistics, economic ties, diplomatic cover, or simply silent submission while the genocide in Gaza continues.

And then there is the role of Arab populations themselves.

Far too many people seem willing to swallow whatever narrative is being pushed through television and social media. At some point, people have to stop defending these ruling classes and ask what their actual principles are.

Because today's enemy can become tomorrow's ally.

How many Syrians were killed by Russia? Yet political circumstances change, governments change, and suddenly yesterday's enemy can become today's partner, in sure Syrian from his house in Germany is giving his blessings, for whatecer that stoge do in syria decided to do in the next decades.

Meanwhile, Iran is the only criminal regiem that remains the ultimate enemy in much of Arab political discourse, described with terms like نظام الملالي and المجوس.i mean When Arab governments decide that another country is the enemy and have American backing they can mobilize every tool available, including religion and sectarian rhetoric.

But somehow the suffering of Iraqis, Palestinians, syrian, Yemenis, Lebanese, and Sudanese becomes selectively important depending on who is responsible and which geopolitical camp you're on.

The US invaded Iraq and contributed to the deaths of hundreds of thousands of Iraqis, yet remains a close strategic partner of many Arab governments. Israel has received enormous American military and political support throughout the Gaza war, while Arab leaders continue meeting with Washington as usual.

So what exactly is the principle here?

If Arab lives genuinely matter, then their suffering cannot be selectively weaponized depending on which enemy is politically convenient. You cannot condemn the killing of Arabs when Iran is responsible, ignore it when Russia is responsible, excuse it when America is responsible, and remain silent when Israel is responsible simply because the perpetrator happens to be an ally.

At this point, I'm mostly watching this shitshow unfold.

But I don't think the ending is going to be good.

Eventually, the consequences of decades of cynical politics, opportunism, authoritarianism, sectarian manipulation, and dependence on outside powers will come back to haunt the region itself.

And when they do, it won't only be the ruling classes who have to live with the consequences its us.

💥Vinícius and his agents' plan is now exposed to everyone!🧵

Delaying the renewal isn't just "ordinary negotiations," but a malicious strategy to drag the management into two scenarios, the less bitter of which is still bitter:

Either cave in to their paralyzing financial demands now, or wait until he becomes a free agent to demand his current salary + a fantasy "signing bonus" just like what happened with Mbappé, especially after he was previously convinced that Mbappé's salary is close to his, with only the difference of a free transfer incentive!

And even more insidious than that? Declarations of love and adoration for Real and assurances of "not seeing himself outside of Madrid"! The goal is clear: avoid the fate of Rabiot, Verratti, or even Mbappé with Paris, to ensure his starting role and continue the plan without any pressures!

Personally? I don't wish for his renewal at all. But if the mercato closes in September and he's still stalling without deciding, it's the management's duty to make him live "hell and torment".. total sidelining, and exclusion even from the bench. Madrid doesn't get blackmailed

​

أود اليوم أن أشارككم قراءة تحليلية للمشهد الرقمي الحالي، وتحديداً حول التطور الخطير الذي طرأ على الخطاب المتعلق بغزة عبر منصات التواصل الاجتماعي. لقد رصدتُ تحولاً عميقاً في الاستراتيجيات المستخدمة للتحكم في السردية وتوجيه الرأي العام.

لفترة طويلة، كانت المعركة الرقمية لدى الصهاينة تتمحور حول إنكار الإبادة الجماعية في غزة . أما اليوم، ومع استحالة حجب حجم الدمار الهائل في غزة عن أعين العالم، فقد تخلت تلك القوى عن الدفوع التقليدية وانتقلت إلى مرحلة أكثر خبثاً وضراوة في حرب الروايات؛ مرحلة تقوم على ثلاث ركائز أساسية يعجز إعلامنا العربي التقليدي، للأسف، عن مجابهتها بفعالية.

أولاً: الانتقال إلى استراتيجية "اغتيال الهوية"

بما أن إنكار الواقع المادي المشهود في غزة لم يعد خياراً واقعياً، فقد تحولت السهام نحو هدف آخر؛ لم يعد المستهدف مجرد كيان سياسي أو فصيل بعينه كحماس او ابو مازن ، بل أصبح المستهدف هو "الهوية الفلسطينية" ذاتها في محاولة لتصفيتها معنوياً.

إذا أمعنا النظر في النقاشات الدائرة على منصات مثل "ريديت" و"إكس" وغيرها، سنجد جهداً ممنهجاً لشيطنة الإنسان الفلسطيني، والعربي عموماً، وتصويره في قالب "المتطرف اللامدنّي" أو الكائن غير القابل للتعايش مع العالم الحديث. الغاية هنا لا تكمن في كسب سجال فكري أو سياسي، بل في تجريد شعب كامل من إنسانيته وعزله عن التعاطف البشري، حتى يصبح العالم أصمَّ وأعمى أمام معاناته وتهجيره. إنها آلية بالغة الخطورة والذكاء، وما زال إعلامنا العربي يقف أمامها عاجزاً، يفتقر إلى الأدوات المناسبة لتفكيكها.

ثانياً: المعايير المزدوجة للخوارزميات والرقابة الممنهجة

إنها المفارقة الصارخة التي يواجهها كل منا؛ فبمجرد أن تطالب بالعدالة المتبادلة، أو تعبّر عن غضبك العارم إزاء عدم التكافؤ الصارخ في هذا الصراع، تسارع الفلاتر الآلية للمنصات الرقمية إلى تصنيف حديثك كـ "تحريض على العنف" أو "خطاب كراهية".

وفي المقابل، يمر الخطاب الفوقي الذي يجرّد الفلسطينيين من إنسانيتهم، ويسوّغ العنف ضدهم، دون حسيب أو رقيب خلف عباءة "شروط الخدمة". إننا لا نواجه مجرد خلل في آليات الإشراف على المحتوى، بل نواجه سياسة تكميم ممنهجة ومصممة بعناية لإرهاق الأصوات الحرة ودفعها نحو اليأس والانكفاء.

ثالثاً: ما نراه ليس خوفاً.. بل هو نزوع نحو "منطق الإمبراطورية"

ثمة وهم شائع يرى أن هذا القمع الشرس للأصوات ينبع من خوف تلك القوى من "فقدان السيطرة على السردية". لكن القراءة الأعمق للأحداث تشير إلى العكس؛ هذا السلوك لا يصدر عن ذعر، بل عن شعور فائض بالقوة المطلقة والتحرر من المحاسبة.

إنهم يسعون للانتقال إلى ما يمكن تسميته "مرحلة الإمبراطورية"؛ وهي الحالة التي تبلغ فيها القوة حداً يغنيها عن تقديم أي تبريرات للعالم. إن الهدف النهائي هو الوصول بوعي المجتمع الدولي إلى نقطة يتقبل فيها الواقع المفروض كأمر واقع دائم، بحيث تصبح ممارسة الهيمنة وتكميم الأفواه أداة لإرساء الوضع الجديد وفرضه كحقيقة غير قابلة للنقاش.

كيف نواجه هذا التحول؟ حل واحد التحلي بالشجاعة و للاستعداد لدفع الاثمنة الاقتصادية و مواجهة هذا الكيان علنا امام اعين العالم .

People are acting like Morocco are somehow the favorites, but that narrative never made much sense to me. If anything, it's the media and fans from Egypt and ronaldo goonets who pushed it.

From a commercial perspective, if someone wants to argue FIFA prefers certain outcomes, it would make more sense to say they'd want the traditional football powers in the semifinals: France with Mbappé, Argentina with Messi, England with Bellingham and Kane, and Spain with Yamal and Pedri. Those are the matchups that attract the biggest global audiences and generate the most revenue. The 2022 World Cup reportedly brought in around $7.5 billion, so it's not crazy to think this tournament could make even more.

As for Morocco, I still think France have the stronger attack and should be favorites. That doesn't mean Morocco can't win football isn't played on paper.

For us, the most important thing is putting on a good performance. We still don't have the same global fan base as the traditional giants, and most of the buzz comes from our own supporters. Consistently competing with the best and playing attractive football is how we earn long-term respect from neutral fans.

Dima Maghreb. 🇲🇦.

​

Ms. Celeste Amarilla,

You are a despicable woman unworthy of your position.

You do not represent Paraguay, a country that has exuded passion and honor throughout the tournament. Because of your recklessness and unabashed racism, the whole world has already forgotten the historic journey and effort your players made during this World Cup, only to be overshadowed by an incompetent woman who is projecting the worst possible image of her country.

I will never allow people like her the freedom to spread their hatred and racism across the world.

Translated with DeepL.com (free version)

This game has been way too physical. We've made too many sloppy passes, and it's all stemming from a lack of focus.

The trickiest part is Canada sitting in a mid-block instead of pressing. They're just making it difficult to play through the middle.

This is the perfect game for someone like Ezzalzouli he could really punish Canada's high line unfortunately he is injured. Anyway, hoping for a much better second half. Let's go.