Talk:Pan-Arabism

Aflaq impacted by Arsuzi who was fascinated with the Nazi ideology of "racial purity"?
In fact Arsuzi stated that he did not see in Aflaq's young movement more than "un mouvement droite soutenu par l'Allemagne nazie et ainsi incompatible avec les idéaux du nationalisme arabe". Aflaq's answer was, that in spite of his stance, regarding the enemy's enemy as a friend, there was no need to copy an ideologie whatsoever. You may reed this in Guingamp's book Hafes el Assad et le parti Baath en Syrie Paris 1996, p. 44). 130.83.12.163 (talk) 19:07, 23 November 2012 (UTC)

Revival
Some have argued that the Arab Spring has triggered a revival of Arab nationalism and Pan-Arabism, as there has been solidarity between the revolutionary movements in all the Arab states and the role of Arab nationalists in the revolutions. Charles Essie (talk) 21:35, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * As a personal opinion, what is notable with the Arab Spring is that the fact that people across the Arab World share the same language enabled online communities/social networks to flourish in a way not possible in the pre-www era. It is not a revival of the very rigid and militaristic pan-Arabism of the Cold War but rather evolution of a new trend of civic nationalism (that, unlike the earler pan-Arab trend, do not deny national or regional particularities of each state). --Soman (talk) 22:22, 7 July 2013 (UTC)
 * I agree, but I would describe this as a new kind of Pan-Arabism, based in revolutionary solidarity between the people of the Arab world in their common struggle for freedom and self-determination. Charles Essie (talk) 01:23, 8 July 2013 (UTC)

Perhaps not so much a centralized union would be sought, but it is almost assured that one of the greatest divider of Arab nations today is politics, and chiefly, the relations of non-democratic states (making most of them dived on issues like a common currency in the Gulf region into camps of spheres of influence). The Arabian peninsula shows the divisions that are often more over ideology or considerations by the leaders of states not any inherent feelings of say Qataris and Bahrainis that they are massively different, rather their respective monarchs would wish to retain power rather than have it delegated. So while in the future revolutions may lead to democracies which in turn would be willing to unify, we are almost guaranteed to see a European union style transnational union emerge.

This is as looking at a world where some Europeans view themselves in a collective regional identity, and holding some cultural unity as well. Culturally European as it were, is one in which Poland, Germany, France, and Spain are all in the EU despite being vastly different. If you know spanish in Spain, it doesn't mean you can go to the other end of the EU in poland and understand or communicate with them.

Take the Arab world, where not only is the same regional or cultural identity present, but unlike the term "European", being "Arab", means that while there will be large regional variations on your culture and language, the basic ARAB culture or language exists, and a morrocan and Saudi ARabian could therefore communicate better than a Pole and Spaniard could in their respective languages. This phenomenon is true of online boards that use Arabic, as well as the standardized Arabic taught across the middle east, which has made the younger generation more educated in a common Arabic language, and reduced some regional differences.

This isn't to suggest that a national identity of Egyptian or Iraqi doesn't exist, many Arabs also identify with their state, but If you look at how a European union managed to unite such different people, an Arab union for people that are diverse but also have more in common could in theory be eaiser. in theory.

As I said, an EU style union is more likely at the present time, actual Political union may happen on smaller scale but who knows. Continue to update the page with what scholars have seen happen post-revolution. However unless enough Arab states become democratic to break the system of each monarch wanting a state to rule, Pan-Arabism is a back burner mainly popular with the people. Although politicians will give lip service to it, some states are more interested in funding islamist rather than pan-arab ideologies, and islamist are often pro-unification themselves (the islamic world as it were including the Arab world), so it's a tangled mess. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.69.168.225 (talk) 15:26, 23 April 2015 (UTC)
 * One thing is sure though. Pan-Arabism is not nearly as dead as this article portrays it to be. We here less about it, sure. But they're are still many groups out there that continue to espouse it. Yes, these days it's mainly Islamists, but as you've said, they tend to be pan-Arabist and pan-Islamist. Pan-Islamism is pretty much an extension of Pan-Arabism anyway (just like how Turanism is an extension of Pan-Turkism). So at the very least, this article should recognize more recent trends, such as the fusion of Islamism and Pan-Arabism promoted by groups like the Muslim Brotherhood. Charles Essie (talk) 21:43, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

Wrong pan Arabic flag used
the image shown on this page associated to pan Arabic flag is wrong. The flag is of Palestine, and not pan Arabic. Pan arabic flag is black, green and white (from the top) with a red triangle on the left hand side Donnaherb (talk) 23:27, 18 October 2023 (UTC)