Post-Assad Syria was, in theory, a blank canvas for revolutionary transformation—in reality, its leaders inherited conditions that narrowed the horizon of possibility before the first stroke was made.
What an utterly miserable Hegel-coded piece of writing. The existence of intellectuals like the authors, who are obsessed with illusionary liberation (AND I WANT IT NOW) is one of the main reasons why Arab countries are so pathetically weak today, because these intellectuals do not know how to advocate for gradual courses of action that lead to national greatness over the long run.
The fact of the matter is, sets of "global norms" have always existed, and is part of how human nations interact with each other. The fact that these norms have expanded in the modern era towards "Capitalist Hegemony" is a function of increasing populations (try farming your own food), modern quality-of-life (including healthcare) expectations, the nature of technology and required access to raw materials needed to maintain national greatness.
In the "capitalist hegemony" system, you do not always get what you want, and you are very constrained by the past, and by the actions of everyone else around you, but there is always room to make small steps towards national greatness. These steps accumulate over the long run. Miserable Hegel-coded Arab intellectuals do not accept this. They see every instance of the global capitalist system blocking a move towards national greatness as a grave offense demanding a rageful response, rather than a small setback requiring careful manuvering and tenacity. They see maintaining amicable relations with "evil" global actors as insult to their honor. They also fail to realize that in the "capitalist hegemony" system, you get a bigger seat at the table if you persist at taking micro-steps towards national greatness and gradually build economic, social and political influence, but no, the Hegel-coded Arab intellectual demands greatness, he demands to witness history changing and he demands to see it NOW.
Had Arab intellectuals in the 1950s and onwards advocated engagement with the capitalist world, while focusing on the importance of education, transparency, scientific achievement, national pride, long-term thinking and the importance of continuously working non-stop towards national greatness, while consistently and politely poking at the limits of what the system allows, Arab nations would be in a much more powerful position today. But no, they had to want instant greatness, quick solutions. They wanted to witness history changing. They wanted liberation, and they wanted it NOW, 70 years ago.
Thanks for the amusing feedback ("Hegel-coded" is pretty funny). You seem upset. Just take a deep breath.
Where in the article do we suggest an idealist "we want it now" model of liberation? We're saying precisely the opposite: there are no alternatives to the current "gradual" course of action. More importantly, and contrary to your claim, there is nothing we're "advocating" for in the piece. You might want to reread the article, you seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
Much of what you say here as a "response" to us is, ironically, a restatement of parts of our argument. You said it yourself: "in the 'capitalist hegemony' system, you do not always get what you want, and you are very constrained." Very good, we agree! The difference is we're not particularly enthused about that fact. But we're under no illusions either. If you think we're wagging a finger at the new Syrian state, you're confused about our point in the article.
The rest of your comments about the 1950s onward are embarrassingly dumb and tell me you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
As someone who wonders a lot whether al-Sharaa has “really changed” (😉), I found this very persuasively argued.
One thing I was wondering: how would the direction that post-revolutionary Iran took fit into your argument?
What an utterly miserable Hegel-coded piece of writing. The existence of intellectuals like the authors, who are obsessed with illusionary liberation (AND I WANT IT NOW) is one of the main reasons why Arab countries are so pathetically weak today, because these intellectuals do not know how to advocate for gradual courses of action that lead to national greatness over the long run.
The fact of the matter is, sets of "global norms" have always existed, and is part of how human nations interact with each other. The fact that these norms have expanded in the modern era towards "Capitalist Hegemony" is a function of increasing populations (try farming your own food), modern quality-of-life (including healthcare) expectations, the nature of technology and required access to raw materials needed to maintain national greatness.
In the "capitalist hegemony" system, you do not always get what you want, and you are very constrained by the past, and by the actions of everyone else around you, but there is always room to make small steps towards national greatness. These steps accumulate over the long run. Miserable Hegel-coded Arab intellectuals do not accept this. They see every instance of the global capitalist system blocking a move towards national greatness as a grave offense demanding a rageful response, rather than a small setback requiring careful manuvering and tenacity. They see maintaining amicable relations with "evil" global actors as insult to their honor. They also fail to realize that in the "capitalist hegemony" system, you get a bigger seat at the table if you persist at taking micro-steps towards national greatness and gradually build economic, social and political influence, but no, the Hegel-coded Arab intellectual demands greatness, he demands to witness history changing and he demands to see it NOW.
Had Arab intellectuals in the 1950s and onwards advocated engagement with the capitalist world, while focusing on the importance of education, transparency, scientific achievement, national pride, long-term thinking and the importance of continuously working non-stop towards national greatness, while consistently and politely poking at the limits of what the system allows, Arab nations would be in a much more powerful position today. But no, they had to want instant greatness, quick solutions. They wanted to witness history changing. They wanted liberation, and they wanted it NOW, 70 years ago.
The authors continue this folly.
Thanks for the amusing feedback ("Hegel-coded" is pretty funny). You seem upset. Just take a deep breath.
Where in the article do we suggest an idealist "we want it now" model of liberation? We're saying precisely the opposite: there are no alternatives to the current "gradual" course of action. More importantly, and contrary to your claim, there is nothing we're "advocating" for in the piece. You might want to reread the article, you seem to have a reading comprehension problem.
Much of what you say here as a "response" to us is, ironically, a restatement of parts of our argument. You said it yourself: "in the 'capitalist hegemony' system, you do not always get what you want, and you are very constrained." Very good, we agree! The difference is we're not particularly enthused about that fact. But we're under no illusions either. If you think we're wagging a finger at the new Syrian state, you're confused about our point in the article.
The rest of your comments about the 1950s onward are embarrassingly dumb and tell me you have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.