Sup Bootlickers, I'm a 15 year old Arab Syrian Anarchist and new to these forums. - Page 14 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

All general discussion about politics that doesn't belong in any of the other forums.

Moderator: PoFo Political Circus Mods

#15017544
Truth To Power wrote:Most Americans have more debt than assets.


Dude I've lived in America and it's nothing compared to how impoverished Syria is. I'm slightly better off than most but that doesn't mean it's a magical wonderland.

Food, clothing, a warm place to sleep, Internet connection, etc.


Food and clothing is expensive for us even if we're relatively well off compared to others in Syria even though food and clothing shouldn't have be payed for. Shelter is expensive to pay the rent for despite the landlord literally contributing nothing to society. He lives off of gating away an essential necessity for society and having people pay for it. My internet connection is effectively illegal by the Syrian state's laws.

We all do.


Dude don't even try to pretend that your experiences are comparable to Syria's. If this is really the case then why aren't Westerners protesting or doing literally anything to stop this?

It's true that even in the West, our rights to liberty have mostly been stripped from us without just compensation and given to the privileged as their private property. But such liberty as you have can also be taken. You could be in prison.


I'd rather die in prison as a free man than live in subservience to the state.

Rest assured however, I'm smart enough to not get in prison.

Mine does: the struggle for freedom, and justice and truth. I guess that's your choice, though.


Dude, if I said I was going to start a revolution what do you think it would be if not a struggle for freedom?

Then they are in terminal conflict with the facts, a conflict they are absolutely certain to lose.


You mean your so called common sense which is based on nothing but conjecture.

Human nature is hierarchical, and has been for millions of years. Anarchists aren't going to change that.[/quotw]

I assume the only societies your aware of have been major empires or states? In which case you probably don't know about the great deal of societies which don't operate hierarchially. I'm not even sure you know what hierarchy is.

Hierarchy primarily refers to relationships of command and subordination. It's origins seem to be in descriptions of the mechanics of divine command in the world: ranks of angels, ranks of religious officials, etc., with all ultimately subordinated to a god. We also use the term to describe systemic advantages and privileges granted to individuals on the basis of particular social or economic roles.

Mere individual differences (in capacity, experience, performance, influence,etc.) are not enough to establish hierarchy. Hierarchies involve roles and persist, often whether or not the individual is actually capable of fulfilling the role. (Bad managers still command exceptional employees. Weak or inept rulers may be deposed, losing the role, but it is still always the ruler who rules. Etc.)



You don't know what a non sequitur is. Or are you going to tell me this is a non sequitur too?



Ah, the "no u" argument. I was under the impression only children say such statements but I have been proven wrong. Take this is as a victory.



If that's how you're defining civilization then you're wrong. It requires a form of resource distribution not government.



Ah so the reason a hunter gatherer ate some poison berries he thought were fine is because a government wasn't there. If a king ordered him to eat those poisoned berries then things would be alot more civilized.



:lol:



@Truth To Power the only thing you've actually proven to readers is your inability to form any cohesive argument.



So you're saying recorded history is stories about history? Are you not aware that history itself is just stories about events that occurred? Whether they are factual or not is an entirely different field.



? I'm sorry the readers aren't going to understand.



If it's the "default condition" then it was never tried at all unlike what you claimed. Duh.
#15017620
@Palmyrene

So you agree that the Arabic language originated around the Levant which includes Lebanon.

The Levant is a region, not a nation.

I never said they were good I said they weren't as bad as European empires. You're gonna have to do alot of persuasion to convince me Arab rule was comparable to that of Congo's. At least Arabs contributed to the infastructure of the lands they conquered and, in the Abbasid Revolution, there was far more representation in Persians and other minorities than there was before.

Compare the death tolls.

Lebanon has those borders due to colonialism. Like I mentioned previously in my review, people thought Lebanon should extend from the Sinai Peninsula in Egypt to Southern Turkey. It is not defined by geography at all. The current borders of Lebanon are what the French let the Lebanese have.

Greater Lebanon was an attempt by the French to put all the Christians and minorities in one nation for political leverage, it's not a local idea.
Lebanon today is geographically defined by high mountains on all sides and the sea on the west.

Not all Arabs are nomads. This is a complete and utter myth. The Nabateans weren't nomads. We all know this, and yet we still claim that Arabs were nomads. There is clear evidence of Arabs living as peasants and urban dwellers, from both the Levant and Egypt, long before Islam.

The Itureans that you mentioned to have lived in west Beqa' are Nomads.
I didn't say anything about all Arabs.

I already mentioned Arab peasants living in the Antilebanon mountains attacking Alexander the Great. And I gave you another example from Michael Macdonald's 'Arabs, Arabias and Arabic before Late Antiquity' which detailed every single sedentary Arab in the Levant at the time.

And I've already told you (if you bother actually reading the response) that their descendants are still living in Lebanon, and don't identify as Arab but rather Aramaic Christians.

No one is native to any area. Humans are only native to Africa due to originating there.

:| :|

Do they speak Arabic, make common Arabic foods such as Shawarma, mate, etc., or engage in Arabic customs? I want an honest answer.

Both. They use Assyrian (yes, it still exists in Lebanon), Greek, and Arabic depending on the circumstance. But no, you will not hear Arabic being used in their own communities among themselves.
When I come by to Lebanon I'll take you to one of their church or festival events and you can see for yourself.

For the food part. Irrelevant. The UK has Shawerma. Here in Belarus we have Chinese food all over the place. Food doesn't mean anything culturally in the current day and age.

Also, Shawerma is Turkish dumby. :lol:

I have. That's why I can say with confidence that they don't. I almost believed you until I decided to fact check with a Druzi who runs a coffee shop downtown.

Bullshit. They're called Mowaheden.
The Druze (/druːz/;[17] Arabic: درزي‎ darzī or durzī, plural دروز durūz; Hebrew: דְּרוּזִי drūzī plural דְּרוּזִים, druzim) are an Arabic-speaking esoteric ethno-religious group[18] originating in Western Asia who self-identify as Al-Muwaḥḥidūn

The word Druze is a derogatory term for them.
I've not only met many Druze, lived by and with them, but also have family members that are Druze.
They recognize all 3 religions and unify them under a general Abrahamic monotheism believe.

According to who?

The standard classification of ethnic groups in the middle east.

Yes, what makes almost everyone in Lebanon Arab is that they speak Arab

In Lebanon there are areas with English, French, Russian, Persian, Assyrian, Greek, etc spoken language. And I don't mean people know how to speak those languages, I mean that the community language is that.
Also, majority of Lebanese people don't even know how to speak Arabic. Purely because Lebanese people are spread out all across the world and only a fraction lives in the middle east currently.

engage in Arab customs

Such as ?
I've lived in Jordan, Kuwait, and UAE for periods of time, and I can tell you their tradition is no where near ours.
Infact, I would go as far as saying that doing some of these traditions and customs would get you killed in Baalbek and much of Lebanon.

and identify as Arab.

Very few, primarily Sunnis, identify as Arabs.

You yourself can identify as Phoenician but you speak Arabic and engage in Arabic customs

Arabic isn't even my home language.
Belarussian is my home language as well as with my wife's family. And Persian with my own family.
And when in Lebanon, if in Beirut Arabic and English, if in Baalbek, mainly Russian and Persian with slight Arabic.

Thus you are Arab unless your tribe is Jewish or Assyrian or something which is far more likely given you said they're Christians.

When did I say my tribe is Christian ? :eh:
My clan is a mixture of branches of Persian and Lebanese tribes, and we're mixed.
Heck, in my direct family I have Shias, Sunnis, Christians both Catholic and Orthodox, and my sister is Zoroastrian.

I'm A. pretty sure they are because they identify as Arab, engage in Arab culture, and speak Arabic and B.

I can tell you one thing for sure, most of the people north of Syria are ethnically Assyrian, and Alawites are ethnically turks.

Ethnicity is a cultural concept not a genetic one

If it's a "cultural" concept, then we wouldn't have prominent physical features for various ethnic groups.
#15017634
anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene


The Levant is a region, not a nation.


Yeah I know. I referred to the Levant because the earliest records of Arabic originate around there.

Compare the death tolls.


I can't find death tolls for the initial Byzantine and Persian conquests because they were started in antiquity and any records of death tolls would be woefully incorrect.

Greater Lebanon was an attempt by the French to put all the Christians and minorities in one nation for political leverage, it's not a local idea.
Lebanon today is geographically defined by high mountains on all sides and the sea on the west.


Lebanon as a concept is not a local idea. The formalized version of Greater Lebanon that the French succeeded in implementing is Lebanon today. Hell, the wikipedia page when searching for Greater Lebanon redirects you to the main Lebanon page and says that "Greater Lebanon" is another name for "Lebanon".

Lebanon is not geographically defined or was originally a concept at all. For most of it's history, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Palestine have all been grouped together in one province.

The Itureans that you mentioned to have lived in west Beqa' are Nomads.
I didn't say anything about all Arabs.


They're semi-nomadic meaning that they were settled in the area.

And I've already told you (if you bother actually reading the response) that their descendants are still living in Lebanon, and don't identify as Arab but rather Aramaic Christians.


I know? I don't see how that has to do with me saying that Arabs weren't all nomadic and that they lived in Lebanon for centuries. You seem to be responding to the wrong part of my post.

:| :|


What? You think humans didn't originate from Africa?

Both. They use Assyrian (yes, it still exists in Lebanon), Greek, and Arabic depending on the circumstance. But no, you will not hear Arabic being used in their own communities among themselves.
When I come by to Lebanon I'll take you to one of their church or festival events and you can see for yourself.


Then they're Assyrian or Aramiac (unless they engage in Arab customs) but they most certainly do not represent the majority of Lebanese and just because a minority doesn't speak Arabic or identifies as such doesn't meam the entire population is exactly the same. Is Syria suddenly not Arab because Assyrians exist? Is Iraq no longer Arab because a small village speaks Aramiac?

Also that sounds fun.

For the food part. Irrelevant. The UK has Shawerma. Here in Belarus we have Chinese food all over the place. Food doesn't mean anything culturally in the current day and age.


Food was an example and it does mean something culturally depending on where it originated.

Also, Shawerma is Turkish dumby. :lol:


Yeah I know but I added it anyways because it's so widespread in the Middle East. Also it's called doner.

If you want a better example, coffee is an Arab drink that originates in Yemen.

Bullshit. They're called Mowaheden.

The word Druze is a derogatory term for them.


I thought Muwahhiden is the Arabic name for them and Druze is the English name?

I've not only met many Druze, lived by and with them, but also have family members that are Druze.
They recognize all 3 religions and unify them under a general Abrahamic monotheism believe.


That's strange since the Muwahhiden I've talked to said that they believe that in tanzih, that God is unity and that, unlike Muslims, they believe that there are no attributes of God distinct from his essence.

Is any one of your Muwahhiden family members an uqqal?

The standard classification of ethnic groups in the middle east.


Do you have any evidence that there even is a standard classification of ethnic groups in the Middle East? Ethnicity is a cultural concept.

In Lebanon there are areas with English, French, Russian, Persian, Assyrian, Greek, etc spoken language. And I don't mean people know how to speak those languages, I mean that the community language is that.
Also, majority of Lebanese people don't even know how to speak Arabic. Purely because Lebanese people are spread out all across the world and only a fraction lives in the middle east currently.


There is similar diversity in Syria with a great deal of people speaking Armenian, Persian, Assyrian, Kurdish, etc. but many of the people who speak those languages either aren't even Arab (people who speak Assyrian absolutely tend not to be) or do speak Arabic in general conversation just not within their community.

Also Lebanese abroad would only be Arab if they identify as such. Lebanese is a nationality so of course they'd technically be "Lebanese".

Such as ?
I've lived in Jordan, Kuwait, and UAE for periods of time, and I can tell you their tradition is no where near ours.
Infact, I would go as far as saying that doing some of these traditions and customs would get you killed in Baalbek and much of Lebanon.


The fact that there's bidets in bathrooms with electricity. Dakbe is common in weddings in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine. Belly dancing is the most famous one. The maqamat style of music is popular around the world. The prominence of public baths around the area. Mezze being a common before meals.
Thobes and some kind of headress being common in rural areas.

Stuff like that.
Very few, primarily Sunnis, identify as Arabs.


No I'm absolutely sure that's wrong. I've went to Lebanon to visit some relatives there and you can tell who's Arab and who isn't mostly because non-Arabs are talked about by Arabs.

Arabic isn't even my home language.
Belarussian is my home language as well as with my wife's family. And Persian with my own family.
And when in Lebanon, if in Beirut Arabic and English, if in Baalbek, mainly Russian and Persian with slight Arabic.


English is the language of business (and it's generally seen as "cool" by the youth) there. Saying it's common is ridiculous.

When did I say my tribe is Christian ? :eh:


You said they had a church.

My clan is a mixture of branches of Persian and Lebanese tribes, and we're mixed.
Heck, in my direct family I have Shias, Sunnis, Christians both Catholic and Orthodox, and my sister is Zoroastrian.


Ok.

I can tell you one thing for sure, most of the people north of Syria are ethnically Assyrian, and Alawites are ethnically turks.


No. If anything they're Kurdish and some Arabs and Turks. Assyrians in Syria aren't really concentrated in one place in particular (Iraqi Assyrians are located in Eastern Central Iraq) so you're wrong on both accounts.

Alevis are Turkish not Alawites. Alawites have an Arab origin. Even their wikipedia page explains this:

The origin of the genetics of Alawites is disputed. Local folklore suggests that they are descendants of the followers of the eleventh Imam, Hasan al-Askari (d. 873) and his pupil, Ibn Nusayr (d. 868)


Hasan al-Askari if you didn't know, was born in Samarra, Egypt.

If it's a "cultural" concept, then we wouldn't have prominent physical features for various ethnic groups.


Burakumin are a considered a differeny ethnic group even if they're genetically identical to native Japanese. The same goes for the different castes of India. Stop ignoring this.

Even in Middle Eastern ethnic groups it's difficult to see the differences between them. In each of Arabs, Persians, Kurds, etc. there are a wide range of physical features from blond, blue eyed people to dark skinned almost African people. And they would still be Arab, Persian, Kurdish, etc.
#15017639
@Palmyrene
Yeah I know. I referred to the Levant because the earliest records of Arabic originate around there.

Then Greek must also originate from the Levant.

I can't find death tolls for the initial Byzantine and Persian conquests because they were started in antiquity and any records of death tolls would be woefully incorrect.

Early Islamic empires rampaged around the world destroying and killing people in mass. Far more than western empires.
Both are bad, but Arab and Islamic empires are worse.
If the Arabs and Muslims had the same tech western empires had, it would've been even worse.

Lebanon as a concept is not a local idea.

Lebanon and it's current borders were mentioned since the earliest inventions of writing.
Far before empires came along.

The formalized version of Greater Lebanon that the French succeeded in implementing is Lebanon today. Hell, the wikipedia page when searching for Greater Lebanon redirects you to the main Lebanon page and says that "Greater Lebanon" is another name for "Lebanon".

The wikipedia page shows you the map intended to be greater Lebanon, and then directs you to the page for Lebanon
where it mentions it as a chapter in Lebanese history.
French dealings with Lebanese people predates this era.

Lebanon is not geographically defined or was originally a concept at all.

It's literally surrounded by mountains. How exactly is this not a geographic border?

For most of it's history, Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and Palestine have all been grouped together in one province.


False.
The region was called the Levant, however within it were multiple kingdoms and nations.
Lebanon was its own nation. Palestine was one with Gaza separate on its own. Jordan was 2 nations, the north was ruled by Al-Ghazawi tribe (which still hold royal titles) and the south was ruled by the Idwan tribe (which the killing of the Idwan prince during the foundation of Jordan and the Hashimite rule is still controversial and occasionally lead to clashes between the southern tribes and the army, especially in Ma'an).
Syria, likewise, was multiple nations where Damascus, Aleppo, and Latakia were all capitals; With the tribes in Al-Jazeera (arab al hadid) being self-governing.

They're semi-nomadic meaning that they were settled in the area.

The parts that settled, settled by mixing with already existing settled peoples and tribes.
That's how nomads always settled in the era of civilizations.

I know? I don't see how that has to do with me saying that Arabs weren't all nomadic and that they lived in Lebanon for centuries. You seem to be responding to the wrong part of my post.

Because the example you gave of Arabs in Lebanon is wrong, the ones you mentioned aren't Arabs, the Aramaean.
There were Arab migrants over the ages, the Druze are an example along with other tribes, and if you go to Lebanon now they still identify as Arabs and everyone refers to them as Arabs in reference to their nomadic origins before migrating and settling in Lebanon.
Talk to anyone in Lebanon, open the topic of people in Anjar, west Beqa' in general, South east, and they'll refer to them as Arabs. Because they're distinctly Arabs, and not native.

What? You think humans didn't originate from Africa?

Both the prior claim and this question are retarded.
Look up what the word native means.

Then they're Assyrian or Aramiac

Aramaic, though their language is dead.

unless they engage in Arab customs

1- There is barely any such thing, each nation has its own traditions and customs (Beduoin customs are not all there is)
2- They don't. They're their own nation with their own history and tradition.

but they most certainly do not represent the majority of Lebanese and just because a minority doesn't speak Arabic or identifies as such doesn't meam the entire population is exactly the same.

There are tons of groups in Lebanon, there is literally no majority in Lebanon, it's a country of minorities as it had always been.
Even if we go back 4000 years in history, Lebanon was still a collection of independent city states with a net of alliances and unions between them and it will always be like that. That doesn't mean there is no such thing as Lebanon, because if it did, then there wont be such thing as a Greek or Italian or German, or Russian, etc identities.
A shared Lebanese identity arose during the Canaanite era 4000 years ago wherein the area was defined as Lebanon from the northern black mountains, to the north of Judea, and from the anti-lebanon (Nahl) mountains to the sea. And everyone started seeing themselves as Lebanese due to the massive cultural expansion that came with the early inventions of writing.

Is Syria suddenly not Arab because Assyrians exist?

It sure does seem like many Syrians don't like the current state and seem to act in accordance with the old traditional borders they used to have before colonial rule. Weird.

Is Iraq no longer Arab because a small village speaks Aramiac?

Iraqis are a mixture of Arabs and Persians. Sunnis are made up of Kurds ( not Arab), and an extension of the Jazeera tribes (Arabs), while Shias are mainly of the Shommari people who are mixed between Arabs and Persians and have distinct identity. This is another example of why colonial borders are useless.

I thought Muwahhiden is the Arabic name for them and Druze is the English name?

Druze is what Sunnis call them, and Muwahiden is what they call themselves.

That's strange since the Muwahhiden I've talked to said that they believe that in tanzih, that God is unity and that, unlike Muslims, they believe that there are no attributes of God distinct from his essence.

ok? What does this has to do with what I said?

Is any one of your Muwahhiden family members an uqqal?

Nope.
Those are very rare.

Do you have any evidence that there even is a standard classification of ethnic groups in the Middle East? Ethnicity is a cultural concept.

You can literally just check for the classification of Semitic people online, it's out there. :eh:

And no, it's not a cultural concept, you're referring to nationality which is a different thing.

Also Lebanese abroad would only be Arab if they identify as such. Lebanese is a nationality so of course they'd technically be "Lebanese".

Lebanese is both a nationality and an ethnicity.
So they identify as both.

The fact that there's bidets in bathrooms with electricity.

As is with most of Asia and Africa. How distinct.

Dakbe is common in weddings in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, and Palestine.

Also common in Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Turkmenstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Azerbijan, most of central Asia in general.
But true, Dabke is most commonly seen in the Levant (Not all of the Arab world unsurprisingly), and it is distinct between countries and nations.
Lebanese Dabke is different from Northern Dabke in Jordan, which is distinct from southern Dabke in Jordan for example.

Belly dancing is the most famous one.

As is with most of the middle east and central Asia, so not Arab per say.


The maqamat style of music is popular around the world.

Not sure what that is but anyways.

The prominence of public baths around the area.

Turkish.

Mezze being a common before meals.

1- It's also in Iran.
And 2- It's different between countries.
Basically, it's appetizers, just like it is all around the world.

Thobes and some kind of headress being common in rural areas.

1- Again, common all over the middle east, central and south Asia.
2- In Lebanon mainly for religious people, and for Shias, for Asyad and Imams.

No I'm absolutely sure that's wrong. I've went to Lebanon to visit some relatives there and you can tell who's Arab and who isn't mostly because non-Arabs are talked about by Arabs.

You mean, foreigners are talked about. Don't worry, we talk about Syrians in Lebanon just like, if not worse, than we talk about Ethiopians and all other foreigners.
The common feature isn't non-Arab, it's non-Lebanese. And it's not hard to tell them apart actually, we Lebanese people talk in two very specific patterns and styles due to our speech being a mixture of several languages, one in the mountains and one in the coast, so it's very easy to tell who isn't Lebanese in Lebanon.
I'm sure if you've been to Lebanon, you noticed how every Lebanese person immediately knew you're not Lebanese.

English is the language of business (and it's generally seen as "cool" by the youth) there. Saying it's common is ridiculous.

I was talking about the languages I use as a reply to you prior statement.

You said they had a church.

Aramiac Christian Church is near by is what I said.

No. If anything they're Kurdish and some Arabs and Turks. Assyrians in Syria aren't really concentrated in one place in particular (Iraqi Assyrians are located in Eastern Central Iraq) so you're wrong on both accounts.

They ethnically are, even if not culturally.

Alevis are Turkish not Alawites. Alawites have an Arab origin.

They both hold the same religion and beliefs and are heavily mixed with each other due to them historically being one ethnicity and community.
It's also why Syria still maintains its claim on the Eskandarona region of Turkey.

Burakumin are a considered a differeny ethnic group even if they're genetically identical to native Japanese. The same goes for the different castes of India. Stop ignoring this.

You're conflating ethnic groups with caste systems.
India is made up of dozens of ethnic groups separate of the caste system.
Japanese people are made up of several ethnic groups, Japanese is a nationality not an ethnic group. They simply have a majority ethnicity so we often confuse the two.

Even in Middle Eastern ethnic groups it's difficult to see the differences between them. In each of Arabs, Persians, Kurds, etc. there are a wide range of physical features from blond, blue eyed people to dark skinned almost African people. And they would still be Arab, Persian, Kurdish, etc.


Here is a quick way to know the difference; Go on google images and search Lebanese people. Then search for Syrian Beduoins, then Iraqi Shias, then Kurds, then Northern Persians, then southern Persians, then Yemenis and look carefully at each of the sets you get.
You'll get distinct physical features that are prevalent in each of these groups because they're different ethnic groups.
#15017650
anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene

Then Greek must also originate from the Levant.


No, because the oldest records of Greek are not from the Levant.

This isn't a "Arabic must originate from the Levant because it came from Phoenician" argument. This is a "the earliest physical evidence of Arabic in the world comes from the Levant".

Early Islamic empires rampaged around the world destroying and killing people in mass. Far more than western empires.
Both are bad, but Arab and Islamic empires are worse.
If the Arabs and Muslims had the same tech western empires had, it would've been even worse.


No, that's a large oversimplification of what happened. They didn't kill people in mass unless you're referring to soldiers. And they were far less systematic about. The actual way the Caliphate went about conquering the Byzantines and Persians was far less formal than Western colonial empires and generally was far more similar to state sanctioned warlordism than anything else. The Caliph set broad objectives and then the generals had the freedom to tackle those objectives however they can. This meant that casualties flucuated. Whether they were brutal or not depended solely on the general leading the expedition.

Lebanon and it's current borders were mentioned since the earliest inventions of writing.
Far before empires came along.


I want proof. I've quoted two books and given you links to several resources to back up my claim. I expect you to do the same instead of making unsubstantiated remarks.

The wikipedia page shows you the map intended to be greater Lebanon, and then directs you to the page for Lebanon
where it mentions it as a chapter in Lebanese history.
French dealings with Lebanese people predates this era.


Yeah, that's why the borders of Greater Lebanon are exactly the same as modern day Lebanon. Because Greater Lebanon was just an unsuccessful French dealing.

I've discussed French dealings before in my review of Inventing Lebanon. I suggest you look into that.

It's literally surrounded by mountains. How exactly is this not a geographic border?


Southern Lebanon has mountains?

And "borders" as a concept are merely imaginary rather than real. Technically a mountain isn't anymore a border than a line drawn in the sand is.

False.
The region was called the Levant, however within it were multiple kingdoms and nations.


Empires have taken over the Levant for centuries and have administrated it almost the same way by putting Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan as one province. Those country names didn't even exist at the time. Of course during Ottoman rule, the notable system did sometimes give rise to de facto kingdoms and the same occurred during the Iranian Intermezzo

But on rare cases when there were multiple kingdoms, none of them called themselves Lebanon. The closest independent kingdom to covering most of what is modern day Lebanon was an Arab kingdom, the Itureans whom I've already mentioned before.

Lebanon was its own nation. Palestine was one with Gaza separate on its own. Jordan was 2 nations, the north was ruled by Al-Ghazawi tribe (which still hold royal titles) and the south was ruled by the Idwan tribe (which the killing of the Idwan prince during the foundation of Jordan and the Hashimite rule is still controversial and occasionally lead to clashes between the southern tribes and the army, especially in Ma'an).
Syria, likewise, was multiple nations where Damascus, Aleppo, and Latakia were all capitals; With the tribes in Al-Jazeera (arab al hadid) being self-governing.


Which time period are you talking about? Because it was not always like this. I couldn't find any info on the tribes you mentioned but the Hashemites only began it's prominence during the late 19th century to early 20th century which was during the time that European influence permeated the region and the French Mandate of Lebanon was in order.

The parts that settled, settled by mixing with already existing settled peoples and tribes.
That's how nomads always settled in the era of civilizations.


Your claims are not backed by any sources. From what I can tell you're making all this up. Lebanon did not exist in the medieval and neither did it exisr

Because the example you gave of Arabs in Lebanon is wrong, the ones you mentioned aren't Arabs, the Aramaean.


And your evidence for this is your own single tribe?

I posted a full list of every single person who identified as Arab in the 11th century. I'll post it again. Read it.

In the ancient sources which have come down to us, the term « Arab » was applied to a large number of different individuals and peoples with a wide range of ways-of-life 11 At various times before the second century AD, Arabs are found in :

– eastern Egypt, the Fayoum and the Delta 12, Sinai 13,
– southern Palestine 14, Samaria 15,
– northern Transjordan 16, southern Transjordan 17,
– the southern parts of the Lebanon, the Beqa̔ Valley and the Anti-Lebanon 18,
– Mount Hermon 19
– northern 20, central 21 and southern Syria 22,
– the Jezīrah 23,
– northern 24, central 25, southern 26 Mesopotamia,
– western Iran 27
– and central Iran 28,
– northern Arabia 29 and the eastern 30 and western 31 coasts of the Peninsula, including the Kamaran islands off the west coast of Yemen 32.

The term is applied to :

– prosperous merchants 33
– tax-collectors 34,
– a barber 35,
– a bird-augurer 36,
– peasant farmers and small landowners 37,
– market gardeners 38,
– a seller of baskets 39,
– brigands 40,
– a gymnasiarch 41,
– founders or restorers of towns and cities 42,
– city-dwellers 43 and rulers of cities 44,
– kings with large numbers of chariots 45,
– guards, policemen, soldiers and paramilitaries 46,
– breeders of sheep and owners of flocks of sheep and herds of goats 47,
– and camel-breeding nomads 48.

Who called themselves Arabs in Antiquity ?

From the ninth century BC, when we first find the term 49, up to, and including, the pre-Islamic poetry and prose of the sixth-seventh centuries AD 50, instances of individuals identifying themselves as « Arabs » are relatively infrequent, and in none of these is it clear what this label meant to the person concerned. I have so far found some sixteen instances in which it would seem safe to take it as a self identification, with an almost equal number about which there are uncertainties; and there are no doubt others which I have missed. All but three of these are from Egypt 51.


What your tribe is does not carry over to the entire Lebanese population.

There were Arab migrants over the ages, the Druze are an example along with other tribes, and if you go to Lebanon now they still identify as Arabs and everyone refers to them as Arabs in reference to their nomadic origins before migrating and settling in Lebanon.
Talk to anyone in Lebanon, open the topic of people in Anjar, west Beqa' in general, South east, and they'll refer to them as Arabs. Because they're distinctly Arabs, and not native.


Don't give me that BS. No one is native to anywhere. The only organism native Lebanon are the grass there. Humans came from Africa to Lebanon. Araemeans, Assyrians, Greeks, Phoenicians, whatever aren't any more native than Arabs are.

And distinctly Arab my ass. A majority of Lebanese people identify as Arab. Are they apparently not native? Do they have to pack up their stuff and leave their homes because they aren't pure like Maronites or Assyrians? Are you going to pull an Israel on them and pretend that it was never their home to begin with?

Both the prior claim and this question are retarded.
Look up what the word native means.


a person born in a specified place or associated with a place by birth, whether subsequently resident there or not.


I have. Those Lebanese Arabs grew up there. They've lived their entire lives there. And you're saying they're foreigners due to your ridiculous and baseless history?

Aramaic, though their language is dead.


We need to revive that language.

1- There is barely any such thing, each nation has its own traditions and customs (Beduoin customs are not all there is)
2- They don't. They're their own nation with their own history and tradition.


Dude, Lebanon was a colonial state created by the French. It does not exist. The Levant itself shares alot of it's culture. There isn't anything exclusively Lebanese or Syrian. Most of the customs you see in Lebanon can be found in Egypt, Syria, or Iraq. Alot of Persian stuff can be found in the Arab world which itself was taken from Babylonians.

Culture isn't exclusive, it is shared by everyone.

There are tons of groups in Lebanon, there is literally no majority in Lebanon, it's a country of minorities as it had always been.


Well I guess the French did a good job then. Got what they wanted.

Even if we go back 4000 years in history, Lebanon was still a collection of independent city states with a net of alliances and unions between them and it will always be like that.


Syria was like that, Iraq was like that, Jordan was like that. The entire Levant was like that. Even Arabia was like that with Mecca and Medina being independent city states. Most medieval countries were like this with exception to Egypt for several reasons.

That doesn't mean there is no such thing as Lebanon, because if it did, then there wont be such thing as a Greek or Italian or German, or Russian, etc identities.


I mean Greek and Italian identity didn't even exist until 1817. Most "Germans" in the 19th century didn't even know how to speak German they spoke other languages. Russian was spoken by the upper class in the 19th century as well.

A shared Lebanese identity arose during the Canaanite era 4000 years ago wherein the area was defined as Lebanon from the northern black mountains, to the north of Judea, and from the anti-lebanon (Nahl) mountains to the sea. And everyone started seeing themselves as Lebanese due to the massive cultural expansion that came with the early inventions of writing.


People identified as Arabs since the 11th century. I've given proof of that. You've given me nothing but a narrative.

This isn't history, this is a story. It's not even a good one at that. There's no records of "Lebanon" existing in the Canaanite era. I'm not even sure nationalism existed back then. Your entire story is BS. It's based on nothing.

It sure does seem like many Syrians don't like the current state and seem to act in accordance with the old traditional borders they used to have before colonial rule. Weird.


Syria isn't a country. It's a state whose borders were drawn by foreigners. It's a fabrication just like Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan. The current state sucks because it is a state.

Iraqis are a mixture of Arabs and Persians.


I want some proof that all Iraqis are a mixture of Arab and Persians. You can't give me any because Iraqi is just a nationality. They can be any race. Even Iraqi Arabs are mixes of loads of different races.

Sunnis are made up of Kurds ( not Arab), and an extension of the Jazeera tribes (Arabs), while Shias are mainly of the Shommari people who are mixed between Arabs and Persians and have distinct identity. This is another example of why colonial borders are useless.


All Sunni Iraqis are Kurds? Shommari people are minorities and are already recognized as a different ethnicity. Nothing you said applies to all Iraqis. For a guy who thinks colonial borders are useless you sure seem to generalize people with them and defend them.

Druze is what Sunnis call them, and Muwahiden is what they call themselves.


Oh. I don't know any other Muwahhiden people and our community is pretty tolerant of other religions. I once learned the English word for Muwahhiden and decided to use it everywhere. I misprounced it but people understood and my mom told me to stop saying it so stopped.

ok? What does this has to do with what I said?


You're the one who started an argument about what Muwahhiden believe in.

Nope.
Those are very rare.


Are they not the imams of the Muwahhiden?

You can literally just check for the classification of Semitic people online, it's out there. :eh:


I've checked and it's linguistic classification not ethnic. All other online sources are just Nazi websites. I think that's where you got this weird notion from.

And no, it's not a cultural concept, you're referring to nationality which is a different thing.


No I'm not.

An ethnic group, a people group, a people, or an ethnicity, is a category of people who identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry or on similarities such as common language, history, society, culture or nation.[1][2] Ethnicity is separate from but related to the concept of races.


Lebanese is both a nationality and an ethnicity.
So they identify as both.


I'm pretty sure if you asked just a regular Lebanese person if they're Arab they would say yes. If you asked them for their nationality they would say Lebanese. You're wrong.

As is with most of Asia and Africa. How distinct.


Islamic parts of Asia and Africa.

Also common in Iran, Turkey, Iraq, Turkmenstan, Uzbekistan, Armenia, Azerbijan, most of central Asia in general.
But true, Dabke is most commonly seen in the Levant (Not all of the Arab world unsurprisingly), and it is distinct between countries and nations.


You just said it's common in most of Central Asia.

Also I know you're wrong because I've been to a Moroccan wedding and they have Dakbe.

Lebanese Dabke is different from Northern Dabke in Jordan, which is distinct from southern Dabke in Jordan for example.


It's still Dakbe.

As is with most of the middle east and central Asia, so not Arab per say.


Well I guess we're all similar then. We should combine with the Middle East, North Africa, and Central Asia. Also Pakistan so the borders won't look weird.

[Quote<
Not sure what that is but anyways.[/quote]

It's Arabic musical notation.

Turkish.


Actually the earliest example of public baths can be found in what is modern day Jordan so they're Arab.

1- It's also in Iran.
And 2- It's different between countries.
Basically, it's appetizers, just like it is all around the world.


So if all of these aren't unique to Arabs what's unique to any Arab country? What's unique to Syria or Lebanon?

1- Again, common all over the middle east, central and south Asia.
2- In Lebanon mainly for religious people, and for Shias, for Asyad and Imams.


Arabs made it though.

You mean, foreigners are talked about. Don't worry, we talk about Syrians in Lebanon just like, if not worse, than we talk about Ethiopians and all other foreigners.


Oh no not that although racism is a problem. I'm saying that Arabs talk about non-Arabs (i.e. Muwahhiden, sometimes Maronites, Assyrians, etc.) and see themselves as different from them.

The common feature isn't non-Arab, it's non-Lebanese. And it's not hard to tell them apart actually, we Lebanese people talk in two very specific patterns and styles due to our speech being a mixture of several languages, one in the mountains and one in the coast, so it's very easy to tell who isn't Lebanese in Lebanon.
I'm sure if you've been to Lebanon, you noticed how every Lebanese person immediately knew you're not Lebanese.


Actually many people didn't know I was Syrian until after I told them I was. It was then I experienced bigotry because people thought I was a refugee.

What you're referring to is a dialect. Every Arab country has it's own dialect.

I was talking about the languages I use as a reply to you prior statement.


What you use doesn't reflect what Lebanese people as a whole use.

Aramiac Christian Church is near by is what I said.


Ohhh.

They ethnically are, even if not culturally.


Ethnicity is a cultural concept.

They both hold the same religion and beliefs and are heavily mixed with each other due to them historically being one ethnicity and community.


No they don't. Alawites make an effort to distinguish themselves from Alevis (because they're names sound similar). They aren't related at all.

It's also why Syria still maintains its claim on the Eskandarona region of Turkey.


No it's because the state wants more influence.

You're conflating ethnic groups with caste systems.
India is made up of dozens of ethnic groups separate of the caste system.


I'm not. Ethnic groups are a cultural concept. The caste system is cultural.

Japanese people are made up of several ethnic groups, Japanese is a nationality not an ethnic group. They simply have a majority ethnicity so we often confuse the two.


The Burakumin are literally genetically identical to native Japanese. And Japanese is considered an ethnicity. Historically it was.

Here is a quick way to know the difference; Go on google images and search Lebanese people. Then search for Syrian Beduoins, then Iraqi Shias, then Kurds, then Northern Persians, then southern Persians, then Yemenis and look carefully at each of the sets you get.
You'll get distinct physical features that are prevalent in each of these groups because they're different ethnic groups.


I won't do that because I don't generalize people based on google image searches.
#15017657
Palmyrene wrote:I hope that clears it up

Don't be silly.

You have waved a magic wand and, magically, you believe you will not be drowning in logistical problems.

sharing resources

And we haven't got round to the 'Calculation Problem', yet.

You appear to want to run a post-scarcity economy in paucity.

distributed networks

Who will manage the warehousing, transport and communications network? A factory requires thousands of different things delivered in a timely manner to keep it operating and not all of them can be sourced locally.

Kropotkin's 'simple economy', localism, doesn't work in an industrialised society.

does not preclude... would voluntarily come together

These autonomous sets of workers are, in reality, not autonomous at all, but under the firm control of the market and their empty stomachs.


:)
#15017677
@Palmyrene
No, because the oldest records of Greek are not from the Levant.

This isn't a "Arabic must originate from the Levant because it came from Phoenician" argument. This is a "the earliest physical evidence of Arabic in the world comes from the Levant".


From the easiest source, wikipedia:
Arabia boasted a wide variety of Semitic languages in antiquity. In the southwest, various Central Semitic languages both belonging to and outside of the Ancient South Arabian family (e.g. Southern Thamudic) were spoken. It is also believed that the ancestors of the Modern South Arabian languages (non-Central Semitic languages) were also spoken in southern Arabia at this time. To the north, in the oases of northern Hejaz, Dadanitic and Taymanitic held some prestige as inscriptional languages. In Najd and parts of western Arabia, a language known to scholars as Thamudic C is attested. In eastern Arabia, inscriptions in a script derived from ASA attest to a language known as Hasaitic. Finally, on the northwestern frontier of Arabia, various languages known to scholars as Thamudic B, Thamudic D, Safaitic, and Hismaic are attested. The last two share important isoglosses with later forms of Arabic, leading scholars to theorize that Safaitic and Hismaic are in fact early forms of Arabic and that they should be considered Old Arabic.

Linguists generally believe that "Old Arabic" (a collection of related dialects that constitute the precursor of Arabic) first emerged around the 1st century CE. Previously, the earliest attestation of Old Arabic was thought to be a single 1st century CE inscription in Sabaic script at Qaryat Al-Faw, in southern present-day Saudi Arabia. However, this inscription does not participate in several of the key innovations of the Arabic language group, such as the conversion of Semitic mimation to nunation in the singular. It is best reassessed as a separate language on the Central Semitic dialect continuum.

It was also thought that Old Arabic coexisted alongside--and then gradually displaced--epigraphic Ancient North Arabian (ANA), which was theorized to have been the regional tongue for many centuries. ANA, despite its name, was considered a very distinct language, and mutually unintelligible, from "Arabic". Scholars named its variant dialects after the towns where the inscriptions were discovered (Dadanitic, Taymanitic, Hismaic, Safaitic). However, most arguments for a single ANA language or language family were based on the shape of the definite article, a prefixed h-. It has been argued that the h- is an archaism and not a shared innovation, and thus unsuitable for language classification, rendering the hypothesis of an ANA language family untenable. Safaitic and Hismaic, previously considered ANA, should be considered Old Arabic due to the fact that they participate in the innovations common to all forms of Arabic.

The earliest attestation of continuous Arabic text in an ancestor of the modern Arabic script are three lines of poetry by a man named Garm(')allāhe found in En Avdat, Israel, and dated to around 125 CE.This is followed by the epitaph of the Lakhmid king Mar 'al-Qays bar 'Amro, dating to 328 CE, found at Namaraa, Syria. From the 4th to the 6th centuries, the Nabataean script evolves into the Arabic script recognizable from the early Islamic era. There are inscriptions in an undotted, 17-letter Arabic script dating to the 6th century CE, found at four locations in Syria (Zabad, Jabal ‘Usays, Harraan, Umm al-Jimaal). The oldest surviving papyrus in Arabic dates to 643 CE, and it uses dots to produce the modern 28-letter Arabic alphabet. The language of that papyrus and of the Qur'an are referred to by linguists as "Quranic Arabic", as distinct from its codification soon thereafter into "Classical Arabic".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic#Classification

Other sources:
https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture ... y-1.199916

The reason I stated, and I will state again, that the inscriptions found in the Levant are not Arabic but a proto-Arabic because the language didn't exist back then, rather local languages existed and they had the alphabets that would later be the basis for the written Arabic language.
Also, Greeks also took their alphabet from Phoenicians.

The Greek alphabet has been used to write the Greek language since the late ninth or early eighth century BC. It is derived from the earlier Phoenician alphabet, and was the first alphabetic script to have distinct letters for vowels as well as consonants.


No, that's a large oversimplification of what happened. They didn't kill people in mass unless you're referring to soldiers. And they were far less systematic about. The actual way the Caliphate went about conquering the Byzantines and Persians was far less formal than Western colonial empires and generally was far more similar to state sanctioned warlordism than anything else. The Caliph set broad objectives and then the generals had the freedom to tackle those objectives however they can. This meant that casualties flucuated. Whether they were brutal or not depended solely on the general leading the expedition.

Nor did most colonial empires.
Congo is an exception of a feudal empire just like our conquest of India is.

I want proof. I've quoted two books and given you links to several resources to back up my claim. I expect you to do the same instead of making unsubstantiated remarks.

It's literally common knowledge.
The area now known as Lebanon first appeared in recorded history around 4000 BC as a group of coastal cities and a heavily forested hinterland. It was inhabited by the Canaanites, a Semitic people, whom the Greeks called "Phoenicians" because of the purple (phoinikies) dye they sold. These early inhabitants referred to themselves as "men of Sidon" or the like, according to their city of origin, and called the country "Lebanon." Because of the nature of the country and its location, the Phoenicians turned to the sea, where they engaged in trade and navigation.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... nt_Lebanon

Southern Lebanon has mountains?

Image
All of Lebanon is covered with mountains of various sizes.

And "borders" as a concept are merely imaginary rather than real. Technically a mountain isn't anymore a border than a line drawn in the sand is.

:lol:

Empires have taken over the Levant for centuries and have administrated it almost the same way by putting Syria, Lebanon, Palestine, and Jordan as one province. Those country names didn't even exist at the time. Of course during Ottoman rule, the notable system did sometimes give rise to de facto kingdoms and the same occurred during the Iranian Intermezzo

But on rare cases when there were multiple kingdoms, none of them called themselves Lebanon. The closest independent kingdom to covering most of what is modern day Lebanon was an Arab kingdom, the Itureans whom I've already mentioned before.

Then you clearly don't know what empires are, or how they're structured.

The Itureans were a nomadic people who conquered west beqa' and the Golan heights, as even mentioned by the very source you quoted. And as stated, their descendants are still in Lebanon and are Aramaic.

Which time period are you talking about? Because it was not always like this.

Some changes have taken place over the centuries, sure. But generally the past several centuries were like that.

I couldn't find any info on the tribes you mentioned but the Hashemites only began it's prominence during the late 19th century to early 20th century which was during the time that European influence permeated the region and the French Mandate of Lebanon was in order.

Read:
The making of Jordan: Tribes, Colonialism, and the modern state.
For the royalty part, I couldn't find English sources, but here's an Arabic one on the passing of Ghazawi prince
https://www.ammonnews.net/article/188923
For the south, look up the Idwan revolt against the British.

Your claims are not backed by any sources. From what I can tell you're making all this up. Lebanon did not exist in the medieval and neither did it exisr

You literally provided the source yourself.
Leading me to think you didn't read your own source. :lol:

And your evidence for this is your own single tribe?

I posted a full list of every single person who identified as Arab in the 11th century. I'll post it again. Read it.

And the single example regarding Lebanon was disputed by your own source and a single search on the internet.

What your tribe is does not carry over to the entire Lebanese population.

Considering the Hazzars mixed with the Humaydiyah tribe, and that the Hymaydiyah tribe make up most tribes in the Beqa', the north, and much of the south with the exception of the coastal cities, that's one heck of a portion.
Adde to that the maronite and greek Christians, and you end up with more than 70% of the population in Lebanon and over 90% of the overall world wide Lebanese population.

A majority of Lebanese people identify as Arab

Majority of Sunni Lebanese identify as Arabs.
Are they apparently not native? Do they have to pack up their stuff and leave their homes because they aren't pure like Maronites or Assyrians? Are you going to pull an Israel on them and pretend that it was never their home to begin with?

No one said anything similar to that, and you probably should stop putting words into my mouth.

They've lived their entire lives there. And you're saying they're foreigners due to your ridiculous and baseless history?

Saying ethnic Lebanese is different than saying Lebanese nationals.
Just like, for example, being British doesn't make you English.

Dude, Lebanon was a colonial state created by the French. It does not exist. The Levant itself shares alot of it's culture. There isn't anything exclusively Lebanese or Syrian. Most of the customs you see in Lebanon can be found in Egypt, Syria, or Iraq. Alot of Persian stuff can be found in the Arab world which itself was taken from Babylonians.

Culture isn't exclusive, it is shared by everyone.

It does apparently, and history disagrees with you.
The country was named Lebanon 4000 years ago.

Syria was like that, Iraq was like that, Jordan was like that. The entire Levant was like that. Even Arabia was like that with Mecca and Medina being independent city states. Most medieval countries were like this with exception to Egypt for several reasons.


True. Assyria for example was a collection of city states before it was an empire, didn't stop it from being a nation.
Nor did it stop the over 50 Persian city states and kingdoms from being a nation before they became a united empire.

I mean Greek and Italian identity didn't even exist until 1817. Most "Germans" in the 19th century didn't even know how to speak German they spoke other languages. Russian was spoken by the upper class in the 19th century as well.

Greeks Identified as Greeks for the past several thousands of years, same for Italians (though they were romans back then). Russians, though were several kingdoms and citystates, identified as Russ all along.
etc.

People identified as Arabs since the 11th century. I've given proof of that. You've given me nothing but a narrative.

This isn't history, this is a story. It's not even a good one at that. There's no records of "Lebanon" existing in the Canaanite era. I'm not even sure nationalism existed back then. Your entire story is BS. It's based on nothing.

your claim is so filled with bullshit that even a brief 2-minute visit to Wikipedia can disprove it.

I want some proof that all Iraqis are a mixture of Arab and Persians. You can't give me any because Iraqi is just a nationality. They can be any race. Even Iraqi Arabs are mixes of loads of different races.

I didn't say all of them were.
I clearly stated who and which groups are which.

All Sunni Iraqis are Kurds?

Sunni Iraqis are made up of Kurds and Arab tribes in the north west. You could've just continued reading the sentence.

Shommari people are minorities and are already recognized as a different ethnicity.

Iraqi Shias are comprised of various tribes of Arab, Persianic, Shammari (corrected the spelling, pronounced it in what we called it not its native name.) descent. Infact, the mix is so large in Iraqi Shia community that the Baathist had to exile anywhere between 400k-1m of them in fear of them siding with Iran, and that currently, only the Sadrist movement is managing to pick up steam with Shia Arabs.

Those are easily verifiable things by just following daily news you know.

Are they not the imams of the Muwahhiden?

Yea, But they're very rare due to the age limit.

I've checked and it's linguistic classification not ethnic. All other online sources are just Nazi websites. I think that's where you got this weird notion from.


So, you checked and checked and checked and didn't come upon the first google sponsered wikipedia page on semitic people at the top of the page?
Nice work.

An ethnic group, a people group, a people, or an ethnicity, is a category of people who identify with each other, usually on the basis of a presumed common genealogy or ancestry or on similarities such as common language, history, society, culture or nation.[1][2] Ethnicity is separate from but related to the concept of races.

Now read on the sentence right after the highlighted part.


I'm pretty sure if you asked just a regular Lebanese person if they're Arab they would say yes. If you asked them for their nationality they would say Lebanese. You're wrong.

Well, since I lived there, and much of my family is there, I can say that when we commonly refer to Arabs, we're referring to the tribes in west Beqa' (which is south Beqa' in geographic location, but it's just called west because it's capital is west of Baalbek).

You just said it's common in most of Central Asia.

Also I know you're wrong because I've been to a Moroccan wedding and they have Dakbe.

Common.
Most common.

Arabs made it though.

Actually variants of these types of robs existed all over the world, apparently, it's the simplest form of clothes in old days.
The headdress for Sunni Imams is Arabic in origin, and Shia Imams is Persian in origin (Because Zoroastrians also wear it)

Actually many people didn't know I was Syrian until after I told them I was. It was then I experienced bigotry because people thought I was a refugee.

Bullshit, If you spoke Arabic in front of them then they immediately know you're not from there.

What you're referring to is a dialect. Every Arab country has it's own dialect.

There are dozens of dialects in Lebanon. Speech patterns however, there are two, primarily due to which languages are mixed in a grammatical sense.

What you use doesn't reflect what Lebanese people as a whole use.

So, in Baalbek, the entire community where my wife's parents live speaking Russian not Arabic, is not reflective of that community.
And where my family lives (the community) speaking a mixture of Arabic, Russian, and Persian is not reflective of that community.
And when I lived in Achrafieh with almost everyone around me not only not speaking Arabic, but a good portion not even understanding it, is not reflective of that community. Right?

No they don't. Alawites make an effort to distinguish themselves from Alevis (because they're names sound similar). They aren't related at all.

Both Ismailis that's for sure.

No it's because the state wants more influence.

Read the news boy, that's not the reason they site.
#15017696
ingliz wrote:Don't be silly.

You have waved a magic wand and, magically, you believe you will not be drowning in logistical problems.


And we haven't got round to the 'Calculation Problem', yet.


I repeat. I don't want bartering.

You appear to want to run a post-scarcity economy in paucity.


How? I just said that if one community or associations requires resources it doesn't have it would federate with other communities or associations which has excess resources or may more easily produce them.


Who will manage the warehousing, transport and communications network?


The workers who run warehousing, transport, and communications now except without a manager to slow things down.

A factory requires thousands of different things delivered in a timely manner to keep it operating and not all of them can be sourced locally.


I've just described how they would get the resources they can't locally several times. Clearly you are misunderstanding.

Kropotkin's 'simple economy', localism, doesn't work in an industrialised society.


One, I'm not relying on Kropotkin and two, that's not what Kropotkin has suggested. You've misunderstood everything.

These autonomous sets of workers are, in reality, not autonomous at all, but under the firm control of the market and their empty stomachs.


Currently but in an anarchist society they would be far more capable of addressing their shared needs.

You are right that workers aren't completely autonomous but that's in the sense that they are dependant upon one another. Ordinary workers know intimately how their field relates and requires the support of other fields. If works can associate and unassociate based on their shared needs they will gain far more autonomy.

:)


:)
Last edited by Palmyrene on 12 Jul 2019 16:23, edited 1 time in total.
#15017698
anasawad wrote:@Palmyrene


From the easiest source, wikipedia:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arabic#Classification

Other sources:
https://www.thenational.ae/arts-culture ... y-1.199916

The reason I stated, and I will state again, that the inscriptions found in the Levant are not Arabic but a proto-Arabic because the language didn't exist back then, rather local languages existed and they had the alphabets that would later be the basis for the written Arabic language.


I'll repeat myself. The oldest inscription of Arabic not proto Arabic, is in the Levant and can be found both in Palestine and Lebanon. The wikipedia article is irrelevant because it is out dated. All the references come from either the 80s or the 2000s.

Also, Greeks also took their alphabet from Phoenicians.


I never said they didn't. I'm saying that there isn't physical proof that Greek originated in Lebanon. Unlike Arabic, Greek could take it's alphabet from Phoenicians but the language itself arose from the Balkans.

Nor did most colonial empires.
Congo is an exception of a feudal empire just like our conquest of India is.


Yes they did. That's what made colonialism particularly bad. Hell, most British colonies were bound to the British due to a series of treaties and declarations rather than outright conquest which made it more difficult to hold the British accountable. India was literally owned by a company and that's the excuse the British used to not do anything, it's a company so we shouldn't get involved.

It's literally common knowledge.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_o ... nt_Lebanon


There are no sources given in wikipedia for that statement. Can you give a source for that statement

Image
All of Lebanon is covered with mountains of various sizes.


The map itself shows that only the darl green are mountains. The south of Lebanon is hills.

:lol:


Alright, how about you declare you house a country and your land it's borders. See if people respect them. Countries are just like that. Do you think Israel respects Palestine's borders or Syria's?

Then you clearly don't know what empires are, or how they're structured.


I know far more than you do as evident by the fact that I can actually name some periods of time and what their administration was like. You don't even know what the notable system is.
The Itureans were a nomadic people who conquered west beqa' and the Golan heights, as even mentioned by the very source you quoted. And as stated, their descendants are still in Lebanon and are Aramaic.


1. They're semi nomadic and had their base around Mount Lebanon. This was the area they called their territory. The map you see in the wikipedia article is in the Roman period. I am referring to the Hellenic period before they were driven out of Mount Lebanon.

2. I'm going to need proof that you can verify that your clan is the descendants of ths Itureans.

Some changes have taken place over the centuries, sure. But generally the past several centuries were like that.


Never say that when it comes to history. The ideas that permeated in previous centuries are completely different from now. Nationalism didn't even exist in the Medieval period.

Read:
The making of Jordan: Tribes, Colonialism, and the modern state.
For the royalty part, I couldn't find English sources, but here's an Arabic one on the passing of Ghazawi prince
https://www.ammonnews.net/article/188923
For the south, look up the Idwan revolt against the British.


Those are all in the 19th century when Lebanon as a state de facto existed under French (or British?) administration.

You literally provided the source yourself.
Leading me to think you didn't read your own source. :lol:


What source? Since clearly I never gave a source that said the Arab settlers are nomads.

And the single example regarding Lebanon was disputed by your own source and a single search on the internet.


How? And what search on the internet?

Considering the Hazzars mixed with the Humaydiyah tribe, and that the Hymaydiyah tribe make up most tribes in the Beqa', the north, and much of the south with the exception of the coastal cities, that's one heck of a portion.
Adde to that the maronite and greek Christians, and you end up with more than 70% of the population in Lebanon and over 90% of the overall world wide Lebanese population.


Ok. No. That's not how genetics. You aren't all genetically identical and even families don't work that way so clearly you aren't all Aramaicl which is a ridiculous notion anyways. Either way, it doesn't determine ethnicity at all. Even you know you're grasping for straws. Tribes mix with other tribes all the time. I recall there's a Lebanese Arab tribe which mixed with Syrian Arab tribes as well.

Majority of Sunni Lebanese identify as Arabs.


So do Shias and some lower class Maronites.

No one said anything similar to that, and you probably should stop putting words into my mouth.


These are your ideas taken to their logical conclusion. In the end your inconsistent beliefs rely upon a sense of superiority over the Lebanese Arab population (who you see as foreign) by asserting your own non-Arabness. You remind me of those upper class Maronites who regard being called Arab as being called a dog or filthy.

Saying ethnic Lebanese is different than saying Lebanese nationals.
Just like, for example, being British doesn't make you English.


There's no such thing as ethnic Lebanese. No one in Lebanon identifies as "ethnically Lebanese". They may be Arab, Assyrian, Maronite, and if they're retarded, Phoenician but no one calls themselves ethnic Lebanese.

Ethnicity is not decided by others, it's decided by the people who identify as that ethnicity. Most people in Lebanon identify as Arab. They are descended from the Arabs who settled and continued to settle there in Lebanon for decades.

It does apparently, and history disagrees with you.
The country was named Lebanon 4000 years ago.


You mean unrefrenced wikipedia page compared to by 100+ page academic historical article?

True. Assyria for example was a collection of city states before it was an empire, didn't stop it from being a nation.


Assyria is not comparable to modern day Syria. Don't even start with that. Assyria, which has beem gone for literally eons, is not something Syrian Arabs identified as other than actual Assyrians.

Also, if empires ruling over a territory counts as a nation, then everyone identified predominantly as Muslim not Arab or anything else because the Caliphate was the longest lasting empire which existed there.

Nor did it stop the over 50 Persian city states and kingdoms from being a nation before they became a united empire.


No, Iran didn't develop a distinct identity until after Alexander took it over and the Sassanids made an attempt to erase all Greek influence from Iran. It was also then that Zoroastrianism became codified as an actual state religion.

Greeks Identified as Greeks for the past several thousands of years,


No they didn't. In the last thousand years they actually identified as Roman. You see, the Byzantine Empire didn't call itself the Byzantine Empire, they called themselves Romans since they were the only surviving part of the Roman Empire. The Western part fell while the Eastern part survived. There's still a small island village off the shore of Greece which still calls itself Roman.

During the Ottoman period, peoples under Ottoman rule were grouped by religion and not by language, under the millet system. Thus the Greeks were simply “Christians”.

Hell, Greece was almost not called Greece. At the beginning of Greek nationalism (late 18th century to early 19th century), there was a fierce competition between the names "Hellenes" and "Romans" as the new name of the Greeks. The name “Hellenes” won, in part because it was useful to evoke the memories of Classical Greece to foreign backers (Britain and France in particular), and in part because “Roman” was then seen as a symbol of the failed, “decadent” Byzantine empire.

same for Italians (though they were romans back then).


No. The short answer is that Napoleon pretty much invented modern unified Italy. The long answer is a bit more complex, with notions of "Italy" changing over time.

The issue of Italian identity has been controversial and debated for a very long time. Italians themselves seem to be unsure: there are examples of Independence and Unification champions travelling to other regions and describing them as "different as Japan" and that was the Age of Nationalism. That's right, Italian regions were soooo different that it was like travelling to another country.

There are generally two different attitudes that are common. One is to identify as Italians against non-Italians. This happens generally abroad and there are examples of this as far back as Boccaccio's novels where even Sicilians are included in the lot. Although the first use if the words Italy and Italians (Italici) dates back to the Bellum Socialis in Roman times.

The other is raising differences when confronting Italians from other regions. This is also reported as far back as early Middle Ages, with a "Lombard" or “Frankish" north and a "Greek" (Byzantine) south and a "Roman" central area that reached as far as Ravenna. The kingdom of Italy, successor if the Lombard kingdom, had its southern border in Tuscany and Marche, and that lasted in Cavour's project in 1850s. The inclusion of southern Italy and Rome in the kingdom was a diversion of Garibaldi and not in the plan of the Piedmontese elites.

But even that's just pushing it. There isn't much which ties Italians together.

Russians, though were several kingdoms and citystates, identified as Russ all along.
etc.


The Kievan Rus was established in the 14th century. It's not an identity, it's a federation of tribes which didn't identify as Russian and it didn't even include most of modern day Russia.

your claim is so filled with bullshit that even a brief 2-minute visit to Wikipedia can disprove it.


Oh so I see more unsourced claims like yours.

I have proof from actual academic books to back my claim. You have unsourced wikipedia articles. You're spouting BS not me.

I didn't say all of them were.
I clearly stated who and which groups are which.


No you said Iraqis. The others you mentioned are minorities not the majority.


Sunni Iraqis are made up of Kurds and Arab tribes in the north west. You could've just continued reading the sentence.


You didn't mention Arabs in the rest of your sentence.

Iraqi Shias are comprised of various tribes of Arab, Persianic, Shammari (corrected the spelling, pronounced it in what we called it not its native name.) descent. Infact, the mix is so large in Iraqi Shia community that the Baathist had to exile anywhere between 400k-1m of them in fear of them siding with Iran, and that currently, only the Sadrist movement is managing to pick up steam with Shia Arabs.


It had nothing to the with genetics. It had to do with the fact that they're Shia. And Arabs make up the plurality. The mix in genetics has nothing to do it. Everyone is mixed. I'm 1% Native American for fuck's sake.

Those are easily verifiable things by just following daily news you know.


I know Saddam murdered loads of Iraqi Shias but I am only aware that he murdered them because they're Shia not because they're mixed. Every Arab is mixed.

Yea, But they're very rare due to the age limit.


What age limit?

So, you checked and checked and checked and didn't come upon the first google sponsered wikipedia page on semitic people at the top of the page?


That's the first place I looked and there was nothing like the classification you described.

Now read on the sentence right after the highlighted part.


I think you should read the "or" because that's what identifying as Arab is and what I am referring. Trying to decide your identity based on genetics is stupid. You'd end up like those Americans who think they're German suddenly because they're 1% German.

Well, since I lived there, and much of my family is there, I can say that when we commonly refer to Arabs, we're referring to the tribes in west Beqa' (which is south Beqa' in geographic location, but it's just called west because it's capital is west of Baalbek).


Your family refers to that. Not the majority of the population. You're not going to convince me based on your own experiences. I want statistics.

Common.
Most common.


?

Actually variants of these types of robs existed all over the world, apparently, it's the simplest form of clothes in old days.
The headdress for Sunni Imams is Arabic in origin, and Shia Imams is Persian in origin (Because Zoroastrians also wear it)


Well I guess we're alot more similar than we give credit for.

But I bet that if you give me loads of what you think are uniquely Lebanese things I bet I could find them in other countries.

Bullshit, If you spoke Arabic in front of them then they immediately know you're not from there.


They knew I wasn't from there. They just didn't know I was Syrian.

There are dozens of dialects in Lebanon. Speech patterns however, there are two, primarily due to which languages are mixed in a grammatical sense.


What? Language is a speech pattern and what languages are mixed.

So, in Baalbek, the entire community where my wife's parents live speaking Russian not Arabic, is not reflective of that community.
And where my family lives (the community) speaking a mixture of Arabic, Russian, and Persian is not reflective of that community.
And when I lived in Achrafieh with almost everyone around me not only not speaking Arabic, but a good portion not even understanding it, is not reflective of that community. Right?


I said the entire Lebanese people not your specific community. Stop making strawman.

Both Ismailis that's for sure.


Just because they're Ismaili doesn't mean they're the same genetically. There's Arab Ismailis in Syria (i.e. the Hashashin), the Fatimids in Egypt were Ismaili, there's Ismailis in Iran and they gave the most Ismailis in the world.

Religion is not indicative of race.

Read the news boy, that's not the reason they site.


Do you seriously think that I would believe state media? States make up BS Casus Bellis all the time so that they can justify aggression. Russia did it with Crimea and Israel did it with Golan Heights.
#15017712
Palmyrene wrote:The workers who run ...

That doesn't really answer the question..

Who is responsible for the infrastructure needed to provide the service, and who will decide what is to be built and where?

excess resources

How will you deal with service industries in general, not just trucking... The workers who provide vital services that don't produce any material resources to swap for food, fuel, etc.

Are you going to pay them in 'labour vouchers' (a wage). If so, who has the job of measuring their worth?


:eh:
Last edited by ingliz on 12 Jul 2019 20:36, edited 3 times in total.
#15017715
Palmyrene wrote: My internet connection is effectively illegal by the Syrian state's laws.

but:

Rest assured however, I'm smart enough to not get in prison.

OK. Good luck with that.
Dude don't even try to pretend that your experiences are comparable to Syria's. If this is really the case then why aren't Westerners protesting or doing literally anything to stop this?

I didn't say my experience was comparable to Syrians, just that we all have bills to pay. As for why I am not protesting or doing anything to stop it: "A thousand hack at the branches of evil to one who is striking at the root." -- Thoreau
I'd rather die in prison as a free man than live in subservience to the state.

It's not possible to die in prison as a free man. Duh.
Dude, if I said I was going to start a revolution what do you think it would be if not a struggle for freedom?

A struggle for power, as most revolutions have turned out to be.
You mean your so called common sense which is based on nothing but conjecture.

It's based on experience.
If it's the "default condition" then it was never tried at all unlike what you claimed. Duh.

?? Uh, no. The default means that's the way it is unless something is done to change it.

For the rest of what you wrote, learn to use the quote function if you want a response.
#15017716
ingliz wrote:That doesn't really answer the question.

How will you deal with service industries in general, not just trucking... The workers who provide vital services that don't produce any material resources to swap for food, fuel, etc.


I said over and over it isn't bartering but apparently you don't know how to read. There's no trading going on. It's entirely based upon needs. If a community or union needs something it doesn't have it would associate with communities and unions that have those resources either in excess or availability would provide them with such resources that they need. The same would go for them as well.

It's mutual aid. There's no exchange or obligations going on. You've missed the entire point.

Are you going to pay them in 'labour vouchers' (a wage). Also, who has the job of measuring their worth?


:eh:


If an association or community wants to use labor vouchers they can and thus their value would be decided by the people using the currency because they would also be issuing it.

Labor vouchers are a thoroughly collectivist concept. It is not necessary in mutualism.
  • 1
  • 12
  • 13
  • 14
  • 15
  • 16
  • 25
Liberalism Is Corrupt

You're all filthy liberals including you @SSDR , […]

I wonder if there'll be a smoked kipper cult with […]

Trump and Russiagate

Trump's playbook: The broad masses of a populati[…]

Why would you think that? :) Why not read it[…]