Is Arabic identity weak among Lebanese?

[MsSPF]

It depends on the individual Lebanese, but I'd say that it's a divided issue, and Lebanon is already a very sectarian country.

That. Lebanon is a very sectarian country with many faiths (Maronites, Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Druzes, Greek Orthodox etc...) and the previous conflicts (especially the civil war) and the actual political issues influenced greatly how the communities identify themselves.
Many Christians like to link themselves with Phoenicians... Muslims less (but it exists). The "ideology" was born with the repartition of Greater Syria when French lead a mandate in the region, probably created in opposition to Arab nationalism. Like most nationalisms at that time, they have been used to influence & shape the region's borders at the easiest convenience of the foreign and local powerful players (refering to Sykes Picot, the end of the Ottoman empire, Zionism & the creation of Israel, Arab leaders of the Arab revolt between 1916/1918 etc...).
The "creation of Lebanon" has been justified anyway to make a Christian majority state in the region. This probably also explains partially why many Christian Lebanese embrace more their Phoenician identity (at the origin of the "Lebanese nationalism" & its revendications as a state), were "less opposed" to the mandate than their neighbors & are more francophiles.
I also think that some Christians like to distance themselves from "Arabs" (and you will find it also among Copts or other Christians in the Middle East) because most people nowadays associate and confuse "Arabism" with Islam, even Arabs & Muslims make the confusion especially when seeing how Wahabbism/Salafism ideologies (very "Arab nationalist-imperalist oriented") are oppressive to the "Arab world" and even more to the "Arab" diaspora since many decades. You even find this kind of "ideologies to distance a group of people from Arabs" in Maghreb (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia), not on religious basis but language/regional one. To be completely honest, being associated anyway to Arabs nowadays in some places can be very "crippling" considering the actual events in the World... no need to lie and pretend it does not have an impact
It has not been always like that though, especially when you know that Michel Aflaq, who was a Christian Syrian, was one of the leader of pan-arabism/Baas party... but thats another story, Syrian in general embrace more "the Arab identity" because of the history of the country. Also compared to Lebanese, they were firmly against the French mandate and opposed to them.

Are Lebanese (no matter their faiths) Arabs ethnically like Saudis, Qataris, Yemenis are etc... ? Certainly not and they are right to say they are not Arabs ethnically speaking. Are they really Phoenicians? Lebanon is the country where Phoenicia prospered and its heritage in the region is important but identifying to a civilization that existed and disappeared thousand of years ago, does it really make a sense? For sure, they really are descendants of the Phoenicians but using this word is maybe obselete?
At the same time, Lebanon definitely share cultural/historical/ecominic affinities with its Arab neighbors and now, being Arab means you speak an Arabic dialect and nothing else... those who think they really are Arabs, are really brainwashed because even our grand parents knew they were not...
Even these dialects are very different between each other, that they could even be considered as "languages". "Arabs" from Morocco to Iraq are really different between each others ethnically and culturally except they share similar languages & cultural references & were part of the same empire many centuries ago... based on Islam. For me, it makes only sense to divide the "Arab world" this way : the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, maybe a part of Mauritania : Berber), Egypt, North Sudan (Egyptian world), Levant (Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan), Gulf Arab countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuweit, Bahrein, Yemen, Oman, UAE, Qatar) and maybe Iraq on its own? Iraq is very divided country anyway, probably the most divided on in the MENA region

[Sacrificed Ram]

The identification of (christian) lebaneses with phoenicians isn't an allucination, it is a genetical fact, they are still 95% identical with canaanites, as found on remains in Israel:

https://www.theapricity.com/forum/sh...Cana-anite-DNA

Also is obvious their cluster with jews and their distance from arabs:


Language and cultural apects are weak argumments, because a sephardic jew that speaks a spanish dialect, doesn't make him spanish, a ashkenazi jew that speaks a german dialect, doesn't make him german and a mizrahi jew that speaks arab, doesn't make him arab (eh, despite some mizrahi are derivative of pre-islamic arabs that converted to judaism).

[CertifiedCracker]

LOL. I am not Black, I am Middle Eastern

Never said you were a coon, I said you sound like one.

[KMack]

They are Uncle Toms because they hate themselves, and they want to be European, especially in the case of the Lebanese. The Lebanese want to be French. If you are implying I have complex, your quite wrong my friend, since I take pride in my culture and ancestry. The Lebanese also like to utter nonsense from their colonial masters they were Phoenicians lol, a people who are long gone before the Christian era. Anyways Lebanon is one of the least achieving nations in the world, and they only have produced artists nothing of worth or value like scientists which other Mideast nations have. Of course these Uncle Toms would be good European proxy like they have always been. Lebanese are known for their sycophant behavior toward their rulers.

What is wrong with wanting to live in Europe and being European or American. People assimilate.
You live in the USA, do you get around on a horse with and rifle dressed like the men in you signature photo? Or did you go the way of Uncle Tom? Asking for a friend of course lol.

[Sacrificed Ram]

The Lebanese also like to utter nonsense from their colonial masters they were Phoenicians lol, a people who are long gone before the Christian era.

Oh, if phoenicians are extinct, then jews are long time also, the situation is the same, israeli state is a farse, but probably after sucessive humiliations arabs defecate of fear in their pants before say something against jews. Even some bedouins fought against other arabs on israli side:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sword_Battalion

[happycow]

What is wrong with wanting to live in Europe and being European or American. People assimilate.
You live in the USA, do you get around on a horse with and rifle dressed like the men in you signature photo? Or did you go the way of Uncle Tom? Asking for a friend of course lol.

There isn't anything wrong with it. Blacks and other minority groups are practically incapable of pointing out the problems that plague their community without being deemed a self hater or an uncle tom. It's sad.

[Kamal900]

That. Lebanon is a very sectarian country with many faiths (Maronites, Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Druzes, Greek Orthodox etc...) and the previous conflicts (especially the civil war) and the actual political issues influenced greatly how the communities identify themselves.
Many Christians like to link themselves with Phoenicians... Muslims less (but it exists). The "ideology" was born with the repartition of Greater Syria when French lead a mandate in the region, probably created in opposition to Arab nationalism. Like most nationalisms at that time, they have been used to influence & shape the region's borders at the easiest convenience of the foreign and local powerful players (refering to Sykes Picot, the end of the Ottoman empire, Zionism & the creation of Israel, Arab leaders of the Arab revolt between 1916/1918 etc...).
The "creation of Lebanon" has been justified anyway to make a Christian majority state in the region. This probably also explains partially why many Christian Lebanese embrace more their Phoenician identity (at the origin of the "Lebanese nationalism" & its revendications as a state), were "less opposed" to the mandate than their neighbors & are more francophiles.
I also think that some Christians like to distance themselves from "Arabs" (and you will find it also among Copts or other Christians in the Middle East) because most people nowadays associate and confuse "Arabism" with Islam, even Arabs & Muslims make the confusion especially when seeing how Wahabbism/Salafism ideologies (very "Arab nationalist-imperalist oriented") are oppressive to the "Arab world" and even more to the "Arab" diaspora since many decades. You even find this kind of "ideologies to distance a group of people from Arabs" in Maghreb (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia), not on religious basis but language/regional one. To be completely honest, being associated anyway to Arabs nowadays in some places can be very "crippling" considering the actual events in the World... no need to lie and pretend it does not have an impact
It has not been always like that though, especially when you know that Michel Aflaq, who was a Christian Syrian, was one of the leader of pan-arabism/Baas party... but thats another story, Syrian in general embrace more "the Arab identity" because of the history of the country. Also compared to Lebanese, they were firmly against the French mandate and opposed to them.

Are Lebanese (no matter their faiths) Arabs ethnically like Saudis, Qataris, Yemenis are etc... ? Certainly not and they are right to say they are not Arabs ethnically speaking. Are they really Phoenicians? Lebanon is the country where Phoenicia prospered and its heritage in the region is important but identifying to a civilization that existed and disappeared thousand of years ago, does it really make a sense? For sure, they really are descendants of the Phoenicians but using this word is maybe obselete?
At the same time, Lebanon definitely share cultural/historical/ecominic affinities with its Arab neighbors and now, being Arab means you speak an Arabic dialect and nothing else... those who think they really are Arabs, are really brainwashed because even our grand parents knew they were not...
Even these dialects are very different between each other, that they could even be considered as "languages". "Arabs" from Morocco to Iraq are really different between each others ethnically and culturally except they share similar languages & cultural references & were part of the same empire many centuries ago... based on Islam. For me, it makes only sense to divide the "Arab world" this way : the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, maybe a part of Mauritania : Berber), Egypt, North Sudan (Egyptian world), Levant (Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan), Gulf Arab countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuweit, Bahrein, Yemen, Oman, UAE, Qatar) and maybe Iraq on its own? Iraq is very divided country anyway, probably the most divided on in the MENA region

Sounds fair, I guess.

[StonyArabia]

Historically, when did any Lebanese claim to be European? maybe it’s only in your head, in your head, Zombie, zombie, zombie, ie, ie....

Those are the facts.

So not only we want to be Europeans, but French too…Great! where from exactly? Lille? Strasbourg? Marseille? Bordeaux? Dijon?

They do, they often say Beirut Paris of the Mideast lol.

So since you take pride in your culture and ancestry, let other people take pride in their culture and ancestry too.

Damn right. However if they truly were, we would not have been having this discussion.

A whole population cannot disappear unless they’re nomads or bedouins. And you know, we’re not nomads nor bedouins.

Nope, population can disappear and good example of the depopulation that happened in Iraq after the Mongol invasion. Arabian Bedouins replaced the population as whole there. Not to mention that the Iranic migrations also replaced the Assyrians there especially in the North. So populations can be replaced.

It’s the same people whose ancestors spoke Canaanite, Aramaic , Syriac, Greek, Latin and recently Arabic.
The language may change, not the people.

Most often the basic stock does not change, but their would be significant admixture. Hence why Anatolian Turks actually have significant Turkic admixture.

Yeah, and that’s why Lebanese are among the most successful worldwide and of U.S. immigrants.

Some but not all of them. Iraqis, Yemenites, and Palis are very successful as well.

What did your nation achieve?

We are the fathers of robotics, because Al-Jazari was an northern Iraqi Arab, certainly something greater than Lebanon ever produced. Al-Jazari was most likely from the Bedouin tribes that settled the region like the Taghalib or possible the Tayy

What did your nation produce, with or without value?

I already told you we are the fathers of robotics, and even the camera was invented by an Iraqi Arab Ibn Al-Haythm

Scientists from which other Middle Eastern countries?

Iraq, Yemen, and North Africa.

You’re saying this as a proud Arab?

The British came through deceit and turmoil in the region, due to the decay of the Ottoman empire. However the Al-Sauds already had warred with the Ottomans long before the British set foot there. Also the British ships often incurred huge damages in the Arab Gulf region. Also the British could not colonize Arabia directly, so they did it indirect manner. Don't compare us to you Levantine. We also defeated the Portuguese and even took over their African colonies, which was quite humiliating for them.

Greetings to T. E. Lawrence

T.E Lawrence had little influence and only upon some of the Arabian tribesmen. My mother's tribe opposed British influence in the region, and actually have put up a good fight against the British in both the Arabian peninsula and Iraq. Also it's due to the British exile they now live in northern Iraq and parts of Syria. Also the House of Saud were never good Anglo-American puppets, because they often told them to f off when things got serious and also not to mention King Fisal gave them the finger, when he blockaded the oil on the West, because he stood up for justice and freedom.

Do you think a comment from king Fisal shows him to be a puppet? On the contrary hence why he was assassinated

[Sacrificed Ram]

Saudis need western weapons, without western support, they will fight again with arches and arrows, while their enemies nuke them. Good luck with radioactive milk.

[StonyArabia]

That. Lebanon is a very sectarian country with many faiths (Maronites, Shia Muslims, Sunni Muslims, Druzes, Greek Orthodox etc...) and the previous conflicts (especially the civil war) and the actual political issues influenced greatly how the communities identify themselves.
Many Christians like to link themselves with Phoenicians... Muslims less (but it exists). The "ideology" was born with the repartition of Greater Syria when French lead a mandate in the region, probably created in opposition to Arab nationalism. Like most nationalisms at that time, they have been used to influence & shape the region's borders at the easiest convenience of the foreign and local powerful players (refering to Sykes Picot, the end of the Ottoman empire, Zionism & the creation of Israel, Arab leaders of the Arab revolt between 1916/1918 etc...).
The "creation of Lebanon" has been justified anyway to make a Christian majority state in the region. This probably also explains partially why many Christian Lebanese embrace more their Phoenician identity (at the origin of the "Lebanese nationalism" & its revendications as a state), were "less opposed" to the mandate than their neighbors & are more francophiles.
I also think that some Christians like to distance themselves from "Arabs" (and you will find it also among Copts or other Christians in the Middle East) because most people nowadays associate and confuse "Arabism" with Islam, even Arabs & Muslims make the confusion especially when seeing how Wahabbism/Salafism ideologies (very "Arab nationalist-imperalist oriented") are oppressive to the "Arab world" and even more to the "Arab" diaspora since many decades. You even find this kind of "ideologies to distance a group of people from Arabs" in Maghreb (Algeria, Morocco, Tunisia), not on religious basis but language/regional one. To be completely honest, being associated anyway to Arabs nowadays in some places can be very "crippling" considering the actual events in the World... no need to lie and pretend it does not have an impact
It has not been always like that though, especially when you know that Michel Aflaq, who was a Christian Syrian, was one of the leader of pan-arabism/Baas party... but thats another story, Syrian in general embrace more "the Arab identity" because of the history of the country. Also compared to Lebanese, they were firmly against the French mandate and opposed to them.

Are Lebanese (no matter their faiths) Arabs ethnically like Saudis, Qataris, Yemenis are etc... ? Certainly not and they are right to say they are not Arabs ethnically speaking. Are they really Phoenicians? Lebanon is the country where Phoenicia prospered and its heritage in the region is important but identifying to a civilization that existed and disappeared thousand of years ago, does it really make a sense? For sure, they really are descendants of the Phoenicians but using this word is maybe obselete?
At the same time, Lebanon definitely share cultural/historical/ecominic affinities with its Arab neighbors and now, being Arab means you speak an Arabic dialect and nothing else... those who think they really are Arabs, are really brainwashed because even our grand parents knew they were not...
Even these dialects are very different between each other, that they could even be considered as "languages". "Arabs" from Morocco to Iraq are really different between each others ethnically and culturally except they share similar languages & cultural references & were part of the same empire many centuries ago... based on Islam. For me, it makes only sense to divide the "Arab world" this way : the Maghreb (Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Libya, maybe a part of Mauritania : Berber), Egypt, North Sudan (Egyptian world), Levant (Lebanon, Palestine, Syria, Jordan), Gulf Arab countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuweit, Bahrein, Yemen, Oman, UAE, Qatar) and maybe Iraq on its own? Iraq is very divided country anyway, probably the most divided on in the MENA region

Iraq is not divided as people think it is. People don't understand that Iraq has always been a tribal society. Having no tribal affiliation in Iraq can be problematic. In fact tribal affiliation is much greater than sectarian one. The sectarian issue is based on religious differences, within each sect claiming to be the truth and thus it's a religious problem. Plus you have some tribal wars if you will between the respective sectarian group, for example there might be conflict between two Sunni Arab tribes, or two Shia Arab tribes. They also would united against strangers. However there is indeed a divide and ethnic one, the Arab groups have an issue with Kurds. Kurds, and Sunni Arabs have problem with land ownership, and claim the that the Kurds are expanding more Westwards, well many Shia Arabs who settled in the North came from the deep South, especially in Kirkuk, were expelled following the 2003 invasion, and still remember this.

Plus most Iraqi Shias strong identify with their Arabian tribal roots, they took refuge in Saudi Arabia before Iran, despite sectarian differences. After all blood is thicker than water. Only the Shia "Arabs" who lack tribal affiliation have a problem with this, because they were not accepted and their origins are outside the country being of Iranian, Levantine, and other origins. These people tend to live mostly in Baghdad, and certain pockets in central Iraq.

Well in the north many of the Arabs have tribal affiliations, and are of Bedouin stock, meaning they have strong blood ties to the Iraqi Shia Arabs, you have such tribes as Shammar and Dafhair both who have moved from the Southern regions and others who have lived since the beginning like the Taghlib, Tayy, in the case of th Dafhair they have converted from Shiaism to Sunnism. Well many of the Shammar clans left the Southern regions, because they did not want to be Shias. You also have non-tribal affiliated Arabs whose origin is probably mix of Islamized Assyrians, Kurds, and what not.

Then you have the Turkmen minority who themselves are divided into sectarian basis more so than the Arab population for a variety of reasons. Being highly marginalized after the 2003 invasion, many of them joined various religious so called Sunni groups. They also wanted to have the score settled with their Shia oppressors in their mind. The Sunni Turkmens speak in Anatolian dialect, well the Shia Turkmens speak more Azeri like.

In Iraq you have the Asli tribes meaning noble, those tribes trace their origins to the Arabian peninsula such as Shammar, Anizah, Utubah,Mutar, ect. These tribesmen have very high status within Iraqi society.

Plus the conversion to Shiaism was recent thing in Iraq, and it's mostly was encouraged by the British, because of the Saudi expansions. The Sauds had already attacked Iraq before, and it took great for the Ottomans to get them out. This is the only reason in fact most of the conversions to Shiaism occurred in the 19th century. The Arabian tribes that did not convert to Shiaism because they continued to live in their Bedouin ways, stayed Sunni from the Malaki school. In one tribe some clans became Sunni, well others became Shia, so it's not clear cut. Well those in the North and West who are Sunni are mostly Hanafi school, well small minority near Jordan are Shafi.

Despite all of these differences based on tribal affiliation and sectarian identity, Iraqis still regard themselves to be of Arabian stock and often proudly proclaim their Bedouin origins.

We really take the idea of I against my brothers, Me and my brothers against our cousins, I and my brothers and my cousins against the strangers to heart. There are many examples of it in Iraq.

As where we are culturally we are close to the Arabian peninsula in total, but there are influences from neighbouring regions. To compare us with the Lebanese is a fallacy, because none of us Sunni or Shia denies his Arabian roots, well like I said unless they have no tribal affiliation they might behave in that manner and those people are minority.

Not to mention it was mostly the traitors, the sycophants, people who lacked any sense of pride and dignity and were given lots of money, and good portion of them lacked tribal affiliation opened the gates to the Anglo-American forces. Also the Anglo-American forces had very hard time in the tribal areas in the southern region, but it was mostly in the West where the Anglo-American forces faced heavy damages, and the rest is well known what happens.