4 ms·

>it works better if you substitute 'arabic nations' with 'dictatorships'. You are correct this applies to dictatorships in general, and in fact the article men

>it works better if you substitute 'arabic nations' with 'dictatorships'. You are correct this applies to dictatorships in general, and in fact the article mentions the similarities to the Soviet military. But then you have to ask why the Arab nations are almost all dictatorships, and that brings you back to culture, at least considerably.

pasabagi 7y ago
Well, most countries are not particularly democratic, but countries with lucrative primary industries, especially strategically important ones, are often dictatorships. Which makes sense, because if you're a big nation, and you want to make sure your access to strategically vital resources is safe, you want to have a friendly government in charge - and a client dictatorship is dependably friendly, since they need you for the weapons they need to stay in power. I'd say there's also the compounding influence of the colonial legacy. A colony usually has no culture of the 'citizen', since the people of the colony are basically a resource exploited by the colonist. Without a deep culture of citizenship, it's kinda hard to get a robust democracy going.
- woodandsteel 7y ago
  >Well, most countries are not particularly democratic And that is due to a great extent to culture, which is what the article is about > A colony usually has no culture of the 'citizen', since the people of the colony are basically a resource exploited by the colonist. But Arab culture prior to the relatively brief period of Western colonization also did not have a concept of citizen, at least not in the democratic sense.
  - pasabagi 7y ago
    >But Arab culture prior to the relatively brief period of Western colonization also did not have a concept of citizen, at least not in the democratic sense. This sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole, and I found: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomanism, which is kinda interesting. I'm thinking the Ottoman thinking is probably the most relevant, since most of the middle east was part of the Ottoman empire.

pasabagi 7y ago

Well, most countries are not particularly democratic, but countries with lucrative primary industries, especially strategically important ones, are often dictatorships. Which makes sense, because if you're a big nation, and you want to make sure your access to strategically vital resources is safe, you want to have a friendly government in charge - and a client dictatorship is dependably friendly, since they need you for the weapons they need to stay in power. I'd say there's also the compounding influence of the colonial legacy. A colony usually has no culture of the 'citizen', since the people of the colony are basically a resource exploited by the colonist. Without a deep culture of citizenship, it's kinda hard to get a robust democracy going.

woodandsteel 7y ago
>Well, most countries are not particularly democratic And that is due to a great extent to culture, which is what the article is about > A colony usually has no culture of the 'citizen', since the people of the colony are basically a resource exploited by the colonist. But Arab culture prior to the relatively brief period of Western colonization also did not have a concept of citizen, at least not in the democratic sense.
- pasabagi 7y ago
  >But Arab culture prior to the relatively brief period of Western colonization also did not have a concept of citizen, at least not in the democratic sense. This sent me down a bit of a rabbit hole, and I found: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomanism https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ottomanism, which is kinda interesting. I'm thinking the Ottoman thinking is probably the most relevant, since most of the middle east was part of the Ottoman empire.