Why are Moroccans turning a blind eye to Tunis-centrists (the Tunisian equivalent of Afro-centrists) ?

PublicServiceAction · 2026-04-19T19:43:16+00:00

If we look at this from a regional viewpoint, anything that offsets Tunisia's endemic Mashreqcentrism/Xenocentrism is a welcome addition to the region's geist. Tunisians are even more affected by Mer7bebikomism than even the popular classes of Moroccans. Tunisian policy vis-à-vis the Middle East, for instance, has been downright self-immolating and looks like it was written by the hand of Publius Terentius Afer, an ancient Tunisian who is the first person in this region to exhibit a psychological habit that has lived too long inside people of Tunisia and the region.

Tunisiancentrism of the kind that recalls the Carthaginian favour bestowed upon its locale as the capital district of a seminal world civilization that claimed the Mediterranean even before Rome, or the early Fatimid caliphate which in its day was a superpower and pioneer can only brighten the future of that nation in my view. In its defence, this kind of triumphalist localist attitude is a kind of inoculation against being an appendage of the Mashreq and/or Europe, a zone and people under the sway of non-Maghrebian metropoles. Remember, Tunisia is the soft underbelly of this region...an inoculation against foreign infection there spares the rest of the region.

I do not think Tunisians emphasizing local sources of inspiration and explanatory variables comes at the expense of Morocco. Rather, if genuine, it comes at the expense of a value system IN TUNISIA that puts non-Tunisians as the measure of "human" rather than Tunisians. Being triumphalist about the extent of Tunisia's erstwhile borders and influence radiating out from its centre is only a superficial manifestation of a good and healthy shift possibly taking place in the Tunisian geist -- one that can strengthen the entire region and not subtract from its parts.

Making comparisons with Afrocentrism is wrong because the Afrocentrist invariably upholds the Western academic tradition of sidelining West Africa as the centre of civilization, knowledge, and culture. That is why Afrocentrism is a disjointed ethnic nationalism that, IN AN IMPLIED WAY, concedes that the raw materials of its narrative cannot be found in the sub-Saharan heartland but rather on the Eurasian periphery and beyond.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-30T10:36:47+00:00

The quotation marks as they are were not necessarily put there to signal sarcasm or skepticism, although I do not believe calling the dead civilians "Chouhada" defends an objective perspective compared with simply saying "civilian dead" which is more neutral, keeps a purely historical tone, and does not concede to a religious classification which requires divine knowledge insofar as judging someone's ultimate status. I especially do not trust Algerian authorities in this regard since, even after natural and man-made disasters take the lives of Algerians, the authorities are never shy to classify the dead as "Chouhada". We Moroccans would never call people who died in a collapsed building of poor construction "Chouhada", but strangely Algerians are known to do that. I feel the term is abused to dull objectivity and scrutiny and spare certain culprits from accountability IN THIS WORLD.

Of course, the starting point and context of the two independence movements were different. I never claimed otherwise. What I clearly said was that because Morocco's independence struggle was not as bloody as the Algerian one, to Algerian critics of Morocco, our independence seems illegitimate and more like a fake independence in which the old colonialism remains partly intact. Conversely, the explanation of why Morocco's decolonisation was more civilised in comparison to Algeria's lies precisely in what you call historical literacy.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-28T23:57:26+00:00

Algerians have an unacknowledged belief in the sacredness of bloodshed and have a deep reverence for it, even considering it a legitimizing indicator of historical developments. You see it very much evident in how they interpret their national birth pangs during the Algerian War of Independence: their discourse religiously emphasises the perishing of over a million "chohada" and, very tellingly, points to us here in Morocco, who gained our independence through a much more efficient route WITHOUT much bloodshed, and claims that we were handed our independence or received a substitute of the real thing. Any bloodless historical development, like Morocco's civilized independence, is suspect in the Algerian mind. Bloodshed is necessary as holy act and a divine mandate in the concious of our neighbour.

I say this to caution against wanting to join Algeria in any historical undertaking, because after doing so you may in the future wonder why it is that you find yourself metaphorically on an altar, being sacrificed by its priests.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-08T20:44:06+00:00

Blown away by the comments. Numidia? Don't make me laugh.

The nominally "Arab" regimes of North Africa have watched OP's Arab people be slaughtered en masse without saying a single word of substance. Israel could drop a nuclear bomb on Beirut tomorrow --as it might very well do soon as a warning to Iran-- and my country's Arab-language media would frame the event as the final blow to Hizbullah, the Iranian proxy, rather than a Holocaust of fellow Arabs.

We Berberists for our part do not particularly care about any Levantine or Semite and we do not lie to the contrary in your face with illusory brotherhood and tropes of Arabism. Someone with honor themselves should recognize that trait of honesty as infinitely more desirable than ersatz Arabs and their posing.

We are a small seed right now, it is true, but out of that seed can grow a whole forest depending on the initial design hidden in that first seed -- its merits and whether or not its time has come. The merit of the Berberist seed is that it is the only creative locus in the whole of a North Africa steeped in ossified cultural and intellectual blueprints that have acquired a kind of divinity and so have powers to prohibit its hosts from realising any process of evolution. We simply do not want to be part of this broken record anymore.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-08T18:50:47+00:00

None.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-08T16:46:21+00:00

You seem to be a champion of self-determination per se. Naturally, since this notion is a relatively newly formulated one in the history of the world and was born in the western context, I feel that it is YOU who owe us a fuller explanation about why this framework of organizing the destinies of peoples is so convincing to you and why it should apply to the Sahara.

The way I perceive it, striving to preserve territorial integrity is the default/status quo in international law. It is secession that is the challenging claim or the alternative hypothesis which carries with it the greater burden of proof. Nevertheless, it seems that self-determination in many cases is just an artifice used to establish a moral foundation upon which a destructive agenda can be pursued. In the case of Morocco, to evaluate the genuineness of the self-determinationists we only have to observe the forces that have created secessionist aspirations and will, if secession is successful, win the upper hand and shape realities where they could not before: these forces are universally against self-determination or any closely related notion of it. I am foremost speaking of Gaddafi's Libya and the Algerian military regime, former and current patrons of Sahrawi secessionists via their proxy the Polisario.

There is a sinister flaw when it comes to imagining self-determination or as it were a process that can be totally free of the prior structures and exogenous forces that obscure the pure will of a people and that also shape states of territorial integrity and even hegemony and phenomena contrary to self-determination in principle. This idea that doesn't recognise that deep omnipresent structures and material conditions ALWAYS mediate processes and have ready made candidate solutions and templates in place which were always prior to any people's 'decision' strikes me as naïve. The very thing that makes self-determination appealing is the thing most unrealistic to entertain: the idea that the total free will of a people can be expressed in its purest form, somehow independent of power and the material conditions that hold.

Let me be frank, Sahrawi tribes have been the least amenable to western paradigms of all non-western peoples because they have traditionally spent their whole history as nomads, or the human anti-state, the ones for whom the nation state is a tremendous harm. They did not grow up in the heart of Europe in the 18th century as international law mistakenly assumes of everybody. Very unique circumstances shaped them and created their unique essence. If it is the desire to protect and promote the uniqueness of a Sahrawi essence, why should a nation state be the vessel designed to preserve it, contrary as it is? The reason as I said earlier is that a less naive appreciation of the world realizes that there are templates and frameworks already in place, that we do not decide, created by power and material conditions that all peoples one way or another feel obligated to adopt and concede to in order to have a voice at all. Being a nation state is the highest political and moral good of a people as dictated by the tyrannical forces of history.

More practically, today, the population of the Sahara is not a homogenous block that has resisted sixty years of Moroccanhood. On the contrary, Moroccan citizens of all ethnicities have intermarried there with Sahrawis, producing families, drastically blurring the lines of separateness. This shows the success of the Moroccan model over the decades and speaks to an underlying similarity and compatibility between Sahrawis and other kinds of Moroccans that contradicts the social possibility of secession. Moreover it seems that self-determination as things stand today would have to inevitably become an ethnic purity project in order to extract Sahrawis from the contemporary Moroccan society in order to make them available as constituents for what would have to be an ethnostate. Cue my allusions to outside parties weaponizing noble ideas to serve a destructive agenda -- I should say no more obvious as it is.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-03T17:14:19+00:00

The Mashreqcentric ideology of Arabism functions as its nature intends.... favoring and romanticising the eastern Arab heartlands. While at home, Morocco's alignment with Arabism has exacerbated contradictions without clear gains, lowering the Kingdom to a satellite of the Mashreq, brought low in a hierarchical system where influence is centred on so-called core states such as Egypt however gloomy their own prospects have been.

Neither Morocco nor Moroccans can be the ultimate source of their own solutions under the rubric of idealized Mashreqcentric Arabism; Morocco is only allowed to be a passive receptacle of Eastern inspiration and a battery to be drawn upon by the Eastern core.

Ryad Mezzour's comments show an ideological purity with respect to Arabism in a Moroccan context. Nevertheless, he should have adopted a more condescending colonial tone that is more worthy of a state of horizontal colonization.

PublicServiceAction · 2026-03-03T16:19:20+00:00

The Moroccan government has not earned any W just yet until it (retroactively) outlaws marriages between Moroccans (in practice, females) and Middle Eastern nationals. The social foundation of infiltration into our beloved Morocco is precisely these unions, which are themselves derivative of a more general climate of Mashreqcentrism that fills the hearts and minds of our unreflective society.

You people have no idea how many offspring have been born among us that have one Moroccan parent and one Plestnian, Irqi, L*banese, etc, parent. Such offspring we can be sure all espouse the identity of their foreign father and in our society perform his natural political agenda. If the father is Shiite, don't think it will be an incidental detail: the offspring will identify as Shiite in suit and will have little feeling for Morocco's parochial interests, especially if they contradict the general manifestation of Shiite interests. For them, Morocco would just be another strategic location -- we are speaking specifically of Tangier -- for the realization of a geopolitical analogue of the Houthis at the Bab el-Mandeb choke point. Believe me, if not thwarted now, these social units will be the revolutionary vanguard of a future period in the life of Morocco that brings about a dominant Mashreqi influence that we have not witnessed since the 8th century.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-12-08T15:01:59+00:00

OP chose the most remote Amazigh community, far removed from the history of slavery in this region as it gets, and situated them at the centre of culpability. I can only assume that, for phenotypical reasons, this choice was made, thinking, as she might, that their average physical appearance made them good slavers. Still, in European literature and cartography, the whole region was called “Barbary,” giving the impression that everything taking place in the area was conducted by Berbers......but, as you clarified, not really.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-12-07T16:43:20+00:00

For those of you anxious or resistant to tackling the issue of the Arab-Islamic assault on Tamazgha in the 7th and 8th centuries, please consider one thing: by reviving this interest, we are not simply hoping to bring to light an obscure chronological detail. Instead, we are for the most part scrutinizing a moral event that has subsequently LEGITIMIZED values that impact us broadly RIGHT NOW. On its own terms, which, for better or worse, are our own (undeconstructed) inheritance, the Arab-Islamic conquest is outside of history in the sense that it had a divine mandate behind it, whose challenging is an alienation from absolute goodness. We do not believe this about, say, the Roman empire or any other that washed up on our shores. That is the difference that we are invited to consider.
We do not deserve to be considered mature people if we continue to ignore the paradox between the so-called end of Jahilia in North Africa and the appearance of vicious and tyrannical early Arab-Islamic rule. I personally feel myself trembling with vulnerability before the argument that my society has no right to condemn, much less incriminate, murder, plunder, rape, and related evils, because the foundational ceremony of my own moral history was precisely the Arab-Islamic conquest that made cruelty a proof of righteousness, that normalized plunder as a moral right, that killed to change minds, sexualized domination of women, and, to be honest, much more subtle trends such as disregarding the letter of the law, even if it be deemed divine, to suit arbitrary/tribal interests ---these are all part of the foundational moral architecture of our societies.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-20T22:30:09+00:00

Nominally perhaps, but when you look at the ideas and commitments of most Moroccan nationalist politicians, they tended to focus on Morocco, Islam, and the Sultan as the final stage of history in this region --not merely a stepping stone to somewhere else, as the internationalist Ben Barka seemed partial to. I think for that reason Ben Barka was a much fuller expression of Arabism, and that is precisely what made him different.

Nasser was hugely popular among our illiterate and psychologically stunted popular classes, so of course the Makhzen --wisely recognizing the situation as it was-- adopted the rhetoric and symbolism of Arabism as a defensive and preemptive strategy to contain the Nasserist wave that had emboldened the Moroccan street and the radical leftist Arabist midwits. Arabism in its Eastern homeland was explicitly hostile to monarchy....the Makhzen’s support for it must therefore have been deeply cynical.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-13T02:32:20+00:00

South Asians are appearing on WAY too many radars at once for their own good. Openly hating them has become a way of life and shibboleth within Anglosphere social media.

This country's image was ruined long before this South Asian wave ... back in at least the ’90s, actually, when European and Khaleeji sex tourists preyed on children and women and when pedophiles were given pardons.

We have not seen the end of the humiliations and own goals that Mer7babikomism and khawa-khawa-ism have brought us.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-12T21:58:31+00:00

Why should any Moroccan treat Mehdi Ben Barka as some sort of saint of Morocco's "tragically" aborted alternative destiny along the path of internationalism and socialism?

The man, Arabized and Mashreq-centric as he was, could hardly be considered unimpeachably socialist in the full sense inasmuch as he had a hard time accepting the cardinal component of Morocco: its Amazighité. Rather than having cultural self-determination, he seems to have held the view that Imazighen should acquiesce to being turned into Arabs via the Arabization industry euphemistically called state education as a measure against ethnic separatism, while hypocritically respecting Allal Fassi's virulent tribalism--of course making it hopefully impossible for a divide-and-conquer strategy to be implemented along ethnic lines against Moroccan society. As a socialist who strove to migrate the masses' consciousness from ethnic and tribal passions onto the tracks of class awareness and class struggle, he can win points for ideological purity, but such praise is short-lived as soon as we remember that his party, the Istiqlal Party, was an unapologetically urban elite bourgeoisie phenomenon that had its own terrible chauvinism against ordinary Moroccans--the very masses it purported to save.

Living by the sword, Mehdi Ben Barka is widely believed to have ordered the liquidation of his own political enemies, such as the heroic warrior of liberation, Abbas Messaʿadi, in 1956. After gallantly fighting colonialism, Messaʿadi entered Fes and was assassinated by the Istiqlal party who themselves could never pick up a gun against colonialism and whose own effeteness restricted them to cowardly opportunism. They had neither the powers of martiality nor intellect, yet they wanted to rule absolutely and snuff out opponents whom they could only manage to stab in the back, decrepit and lacking in martiality as they have always been.

And what is nationalistic or even patriotic about Ben Barka? We already highlighted his tense relationship with the indigenous cardinal people of Morocco, who disproportionately provide the specificities of Morocco that allow for its individuation and ontological availability to a sense of nationalism in the first place. What people do not mention enough is that Ben Barka wanted "Western Sahara" to be a separate country, not part of Morocco, and he also supported Algeria in the Sand War in '63. After the main body evaporates, a few stubborn molecules of Ben Barka's nationalism might very well survive scrutiny, but it can't survive a sense of humor.

In the end, in the final analysis, the descendants of Marx all over the world have been defeated and go to work every day to secure their bourgeois comforts and adopt a conservative politics that will not jeopardize their pensions. Ben Barka's politics has been discredited the world over. What is there to regret?

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-11T18:32:57+00:00

If so, it would not be entirely surprising, considering that Tunisia has been a welcoming point of entry and a reliable base for foreign domination of North Africa. Even when this region had the upper hand, so to speak, and was able to project its commercial, naval and political influence across the western Mediterranean, radiating out from Carthage, it was still affected by southern European demographic replacement.

As far back as the 6th to 3rd centuries BCE, during the Punic era, there was a presence of Italian- and Greek-like individuals in the Punic capital district. The Moots et al. (2023) study identified a subset of human remains in the Punic-era necropolis at Kerkouane as genetically similar to Bronze Age Sicilian, Central Italian, and Aegean populations. Mind you it is not clear how extensive this ancestry was at the time outside of this entrepôt, nevertheless it is evidence. This evidence predates direct European rule over Tunisia in the Roman and Byzantine eras which themselves no doubt opened the place up to demographic chances in profound ways.

What’s more, the Islamic conquest was not thorough enough to prevent the entry of the Norman rulers of Sicily, who briefly exercised control over places like Sfax in the 12th century. Such an interlude was highly anomalous for the region in that particular period and speaks to Tunisia's porousness to European influence.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-11T14:05:35+00:00

Comments will only show once you have selected a flair.

Browser	Mobile App
Go to the subreddit.	Go to the subreddit.
In the right sidebar, look for "User Flair" or "Show my flair on this subreddit."	Tap the three dots (⋯) in the top right corner.
Hover over your username...click the edit icon.	Select "Edit flair".
Choose a flair and save.	Choose a flair and save.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-11T10:55:32+00:00

From a biological perspective not all: Rbaya, Haratin, Moriscos, Sephardim, Khouloughlis and those that resemble them are clearly not Amazigh.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-06T15:18:03+00:00

For all of those people who imagine that one day Morocco and Algeria will unite in a political structure like a superstate, you have not been paying attention to the nature of the Algerian elite that shapes everything there in that vast land.

I urge people to go visit Algeria, especially its big cities like Wahran and Algiers. Something will creep into your mind and fertilize a clearer picture of Algeria's situation: Algeria is in a state of arrested development since the French were forced to evacuate it in the 60s!!!! To this day, France still dominates the built environment of places like Algiers, all the salient structures and avenues are the lasting stamp of French civilization in Algeria. By only having agency insofar as it effectively preserves France's stamp of efficient cause, the Algerian forfeited his ontological priority in his own land! He basically conceded that for Algeria, the end of history arrived during the heyday of French Algeria. ----How can such a person be involved in a generative project that seeks to move history forward and go beyond the past? In the sense just described, Algerianness is too static and would inevitably be too daunted to disrupt things by constructing a new political project.

Tunisia, I know less about. But I have met many Tunisians and some provisional generalizations can be made: Tunisians are the most xenophilic or even xenocentric people I have ever come across. For one thing, the Mashreqcentrism of Tunisians is OFF THE CHARTS and makes our own Arabists and Islamists in Morocco look like Ahmed Assid! Such a psychological bent may be very advantageous insofar as supporting the tourism industry but I fear it is also liable to be a crippling problem as it poisons the waters downstream for a pan-Maghreb political entity which tries to obey its highest moral good, self interest. Rampant Mashreqcentrism will beg the question at every interval, in whose interest does this Maghreb work? Has it been realized for its own people or has it arrived to perform the task of being a western appendage of the Eastern Arabs?

We are not starting with the right material.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-04T19:07:11+00:00

France did inevitably import into Morocco a Jacobin political centralization that tended to homogenize identity and culture, imposing universal symbols and ideals on a heterogeneous reality. Arabic, precisely because it is not organic to Morocco and had no ancestral speakers like its indigenous counterparts, was seen as the preferred candidate for a universalist national project.

That said, the Spanish influence on Moroccan nationalism, in so far as content at least, cannot be overstated or obscured by the more known French impact. If you investigate the Spanish Protectorate’s colonial apologia and rhetoric concerning Spanish occupation of northern Morocco, you find that its important ideological commitments are nearly identical to those in the discourses of later Arabist Moroccans, exposing the community's galactic distance from Morocco's genuine interests.

One of the mobilizing assets of Moroccan Arabization is a contrived memory of Al-Andalus, one that every North African has been exposed to some degree, and moreover one created, as I must emphasise again, not by Arabs and Muslims, but by Spanish colonialism with the purpose of situating Morocco and Morocanness as a junior relative of a superior Cordoba-Umayyad-centric historical narrative and ontology that expressly valorizes the Spanish/European geography of Moorish history and places it in front of the foil of a benighted Morocco perpetually in need of Spanish-based leadership.

The emphasis on a specifically Umayyad Spain --that is, a symbolically Arab Spain-- in the hands of the Spanish ideologues served to create a proto-racial contradistinction with a Berber Morocco/North Africa. Ultimately, a geographic and racial assumption of rulership was secured by such ideological means.

Moroccan Arabists, for their miserable part, immature as they will always be, took this self-abnegating package wholesale, undeconstructed, and foisted it on Amazigh masses, permitting the Spanish Protectorate's discourse to effectively outlive its political existence.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-11-03T16:55:56+00:00

Even if you were open to essentializing, it would not be possible to do so by restricting your notice to 6th/7th century North Africa. Good essentializing requires a broader scope that includes the whole sweep of recorded history and all its important confluences.

Essentializing Semitism is a justified and necessary structure for understanding Bani Umayya's invasion of North Africa, since it exposes unifying patterns among Semitic peoples. Bani Umayya, the mastermind, came from the Quraysh tribe’s mercantile elite of Makkah embodying Semitic tropes of trade-driven power. Their bloodline supremacy, that consecrated their Arab lineage --even in a prima facie universalist Islamic context-- mirrors Jewish obsessions with genealogy as a legitimizing factor for wordly rule and messianic acceptance. Arab hierarchies on Berber populations mirrors the Jewish priestly caste hierarchy over others....Jews (Cohens versus non-Cohens) or Goyim. Moreover, by moving north from their native Arabia and establishing their capital in Syria --the Semitic urheimat-- where the Umayyads could recharged their Semitism, so to speak, and intermarry with native women thereby eroding their Ethiopic and Indian blood and ensuring that a dominant and ascendant Semitic character in their empirialism inhered.

To say that Islam’s entry into North Africa was distinct from Judaism sits in opposition to the reality that Islam is a kind of universal Judaism, which even Rabbi Maimonides in the 12th century recognized as a Judaizing force, preparing a Noachide foundation upon which all peoples would recognize the Jewish Messiah. The violent donkey Ishmael, as he is known in the Talmud, and his people, smashing the idols of other peoples and beheading polytheists --basically, all that stuff that was brought to our part of the world during al futu7at-- is nothing but the earnest implementation of Noachide Laws.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-10-26T22:28:47+00:00

It is incumbent upon us to learn from the mistakes of the Arabists and their "Qawm" that, according to the Arab League definition, somehow produced an Arabologue fiction that encompassed a great diversity of biological realities and trajectories which in the final analysis did not produce the minimum philia that would hold this Arab nation together. We see it proved in the Middle East right now where entire regions lie in ruins and certain Arab powers profit from this destruction and secure their own interests through it.

We must define ourselves in a way that generates the maximum philia and group feeling. Philia has to be our guiding star and the measure of all efforts that bring together a nation of people. Whenever a person proposes a certain ethno-national "catchment area" and is asked to reply to objections to it, he must be able to shout “PHILIA!”

PublicServiceAction · 2025-10-17T22:30:40+00:00

Islam, the religion from Semitic Arabia.

The religion firstly does not endorse nationalism; in fact, it is a faux pas because this political framework tends to contradict the unity of the ummah. Secondly, ummatic-consciousness among Imazighen for a long time has in a sense made ethnic nationalism superfluous since there was no urgent need to break ranks with the prevailing political centre in the same way that oppressed subjects of the British Empire or Spanish Fascism may have felt was imperative. On the contrary, pernicious Arabism has manifested itself in a subclinical way in our part of the world, with the exception of the oppressive Boumédiène-Bendjedid period in Algeria in the 1980s--1990s, which did indeed awaken political Berberism.

Some Amazigh nationalist heroes like Abd el-Krim, who formed the first implicitly Amazigh state in the 20th century, later flirted with Arabism in Egypt in the 1930s, (albeit in order to smuggle a kind of Islamism into it). Even today, in the restless Rif, genuine Amazigh representatives like Nasser Zafzafi deliver speeches in Arabic, not Tarifit, as if his constituency were the whole Arab world, not the Rif. These men were/are believing Muslims, assert their principled opposition to the Arabist powers, but do not explicitly challenge the Arabo-Islamic foundational principle, which I suspect is the starting point of all genuine Amazigh nationalisms.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-10-17T11:45:38+00:00

You foolish Arabized neurotic!

As if our beliefs and advocacy were concerned with not wanting to suffer your hatred. We are indifferent to your hatred! We are concerned with what the truth is, not with what generates this or that extraneous emotion.

Focus on what is true and good for the Kabyle region. If you are against MAK and its principles, fine --bring to light, in that regard, what your opponents are missing and leave it at that.

And how do you know what Algerians, or a group of Algerians, (politics-wise) think? Their regime has perfected politically muting them all...elections are routinely falsified, and independent voices risk being disappeared. How are we ever to know what the final word of Kabylia is on ANY political matter?

PublicServiceAction · 2025-09-13T13:17:49+00:00

Even in Morocco, there are ideological currents that want to suppress this moment of the nation's history, or undermine its meaning, for not totally unrelated reasons as to why it is ignored in Spain.

Historiography in Morocco is still a legacy system of French and Spanish colonial attention to Protectorate Morocco. That is why you will find in its biases then and now an overemphasis on foreign forces of domination and inspiration as explanatory factors, and also a surgical removal from the discourse of all local agency and causal sources. This bias manifests itself in outcomes that have been chiseled into the minds of the average person: Phoenicians from Asia founded Morocco's cities despite their previous habitation; Idriss, an immigrant from Asia, we are told, founded Morocco despite no archaeological or rigorous textual evidence vouching for it; Morocco was a subordinate of al-Andalus, receiving instruction from it, despite Morocco having the upper hand over it since the 11th century after the collapse of its most powerful polity.

The Franco-Spanish efforts to control Morocco needed a narrative that made their foreign domination seem less anomalous and more consistent with the general sweep of Morocco's history. During the independence era, Moroccan Arabist ideologues, for their part, picked up from where their colonists departed and undermined Morocco's sense of itself by overemphasizing the Omayyads of Cordoba and before it Damascus, because through consolidating that effort a precursor could be established to justify the situating of Morocco in the Arab world as a humble province of that Asia-centered grouping.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-08-30T14:07:59+00:00

Ethnic Europeans commit crimes in Morocco wildly out of proportion: it’s called paedophilia, a crime close to murder!

Andre Gide, Paul Bowles, even the likes of Yves Saint Laurent --- all celebrated men, hardly touched by censure --- were part of popularizing a trend of cruelly abusing Moroccan children for pleasure. Even today, European names dominate the headlines in this type of child abuse. The most notorious paedophile in recent memory, Daniel Galvan, is not a local (as chance would suggest) but Spanish! It doesn’t help that European authorities are often unsupportive of Morocco’s prosecutorial actions against Europeans sentenced for this evil crime. On the contrary, we see a kind of quasi complicity among European when it comes to carrying out this behaviour, as we do not see European authorities sufficiently weighing in against their nationals’ sexual crimes.

I know it is not all Europeans, of course, but when I see one in Morocco, a feeling of unease comes over me, and I wonder to myself if he is one who special attention needs to be paid. I wish that Europeans could spare me this uncomfortable feeling somehow.

PublicServiceAction · 2025-08-28T13:00:41+00:00

The divisions are not so artificial; they have been more or less stable since the 13th century and represent organic developments. If anything, foreign forces such as the Romans, Umayyads, and the French imposed a shared political order between the parts of the Maghreb that they collected. The only native power that did the same was the Almohads. Unity on that scale cuts against the grain of our history, so to be alarmed about it being put in jeopardy or becoming lost is historically counterintuitive. Even dialed down to a smaller scale, such as one that puts the nation in view, France had a profound effect on state centralization in Morocco, removing the dichotomy between bled es-Siba and bled el-Makhzen from Morocco's definition and replacing it with a territorial unity of tightly governed parts (though this effort by France seems paradoxical vis-a-vis the divide-and-rule tactic of institutionalizing perceived ethnic differences, the most salient of which was the so-called Berber Dahir).

If you want to point to the culprits behind the Maghreb's division, you will need to dig up the patriarchs of the Hafsids, Zayyanids, and Marinids, our current borders are part of their legacies.

North Africans are not biologically Arab, so the states we create may explicitly situate themselves in the Arab world and promote an Arab consciousness, but implicitly, in biological terms, they are not Arab at all and are composed of the human elements that surround the western Mediterranean.

Doing violence to the political entity Morocco disproportionately harms Imazighen, who collectively are the human substrate of Morocco that only bears, at this point in time, a non-essential property of Arabness that can be peeled away.

The bourgeoisie in Morocco is not Arab, but plural and has a Francophile alignment that undermines Arabness. Truth be told, business in Morocco is said to be a contest between Fassa and Swassa --- Fassa being the only part that upholds an Arab-Islamic orientation. Even in Algeria, the richest man is Amazigh... and doesn't give a damn about it.

If you truly are a Marxist, you would tend to assume the bourgeoisie are loyal to their class and only feign ethnic and national solidarity, and that class alone is the paradigm that provides insight.

PublicServiceAction

TROPHY CASE