Vol. 15 No. 15 (2015): Scientific Journal Referee Issue: 15
Literature abounds with various terminologies for the old colonial powers and the colonized countries. Among these terminologies are the developed world and the underdeveloped world, with the latter term eventually replaced by "developing" as a euphemism. Other terms include the Global North and the Global South, and the Third World. Our Arabic-speaking region falls within the realm of the underdeveloped, the Global South, or the impoverished countries.
Regardless of the terminologies or the political and economic attributes used to classify societies, one undeniable fact remains: intellectuals—whether in the advanced northern societies or the underdeveloped southern societies—are the primary agents of societal growth and change or its hindrance. This distinction becomes evident when comparing Western intellectuals to our own, as will be illustrated.
The liberation of our Arabic-speaking societies from colonial rule began after World War II. The second half of the twentieth century witnessed two significant developments: the expansion of liberation movements and the division of our societies into progressive, democracy-aspiring, inclusive communities, and regressive, exclusionary, theocratic ones.
Over time, the momentum of the progressive liberation communities waned, aligning more with the regressive, theocratic, authoritarian, and exclusionary regimes. However, the cultural framework infused with values of liberation and progressivism, which shaped the generations of the latter half of the twentieth century, did not diminish. Consequently, a group of (partisan) intellectuals advocating for freedom, equality, and non-enslavement emerged within these (liberated) societies. These intellectuals spread across the entire political spectrum: religious parties, socialist, Baathist, Nasserite, and other affiliations.
Ignorantly, we believed that these intellectuals were the hope of their peoples for liberation from tyranny and enslavement, given their espoused values of freedom and equality. However, it became evident, especially after the so-called Arab revolution, that the true, deeply rooted objective of these intellectuals was to seize power, not to serve society and achieve freedom and equality, but to enjoy the wealth and influence that power brings. This became apparent as they were willing to ally with their traditional enemy—what they previously labeled in their literature as colonialism and reactionary forces—against their own societies. The current events on the ground testify to this, as parties and these intellectuals have shown they are fully prepared to destroy their societies and peoples to gain power, giving rise to a new political term: "sharing and partitioning," with everyone wanting a piece of the pie.
This culture of sharing and partitioning distinguishes the intellectual in our Arabic-speaking societies from those in the North. The former is free, independent of and not reliant on power, and has succeeded in transforming and elevating their society. In contrast, the latter is a product of power, dependent on it, lacking freedom and independence. Thus, they live in a constant state of alienation, saying what they do not do, serving as tools of destruction and sabotage, and cannot be relied upon as they are the root and cause of societal setbacks. Furthermore, our parties and intellectuals are governed by a gang mentality focused on plunder and exclusion.
It saddens me to conclude this editorial by saying that the second decade of the twenty-first century marks the beginning of a new era of ethics characterized by dependency, humiliation, and submission to traditional colonial and reactionary forces. These new ethics have led researchers and writers to withdraw from engaging with the issues in the Arabic-speaking arena. This is clearly evident in the topics covered in this issue of the magazine, which address various and diverse issues without focusing on a single framework.
Editorial Board
