Nèdeem Elmahjoub's blog

A short reply to this question circulating in the social media. I fundamentally disagree with the basics of the analysis and the appeal. As the question states there are Arab nations, not one. They have been divided for a long time. They do not have common interests. Nor do they have an 'Arab NATO' or form  an 'Arab EU'.  So any comparison with one nation like Canada or England, for example, and that the US would defend in the event of a foreign attack, is misplaced. The US in fact would hurry to defend the UAE or Saudi Arabia. The Arab nations are divided and ruled by ruling classes (combrador bourgeoisies with different colours) that have more in common with the rulers in the West than with the Arab people in the respective countries. One has to link colonial division with the neocolonial studies as students at universities are doing. The UAE    and Turkey, for example, have been expanding their strategic outreach for more capital accummulation. Saudi Arabia has...

What is interesting in engaging with ChatGPT is not the answers themselves as the way it does generate them. My questions and comments are in red. _______________ “Human species, intractably divided on questions of value and definitions of the best regime.” How accurate is this? The quote —  “human species, intractably divided on questions of value and definitions of the best regime”  — is broadly accurate and reflects a deep tension in political philosophy, anthropology, and international relations. Here’s a breakdown of how and why this is accurate: Why it's accurate Historical Evidence Across history and cultures, humans have been deeply divided over: What constitutes justice (e.g., divine law vs. secular law). What makes a good society (e.g., hierarchy vs. equality, liberty vs. order). Who should rule (e.g., monarchy, aristocracy, democracy, technocracy). Competing Philosophical Traditions From  Plato and Aristotle  to  Rawls, Foucault, and Fanon , political...