Any interest in this TL idea?

I am thinking of a writing a TL based on an alternate Arab Spring. The basic idea is to have an obscure (fictional) philosopher create a new ideology that is a blend of Nasserist Pan-Arabism with radical liberal democratic ideals. He writes and secretly publishes this in the '90s and is influenced by John Locke and Rousseau. He is executed by the regime* on trumped up charges and dies largely unmourned. His ideas are rediscovered in the late 2000s as dissidents across the Middle East link up online and he overnight becomes the philosophical basis for a spanking new ideology. Republican Pan-Arabists create an effective underground and start co-coordinating an international uprising. Think something like the committees of correspondence during ARW only online and a far more grassroots level approach. Regimes crack down ever more harshly on dissent and in spring of 2011 it finally gets the spark it needs to burst forth...
If there is enough interest in this then I will start writing down the TL and putting in the time for research. Any criticism, thoughts are welcome. Any relevant sources for research on this would be great.
* I am leaning towards either Syria, Iraq or Egypt as country of origin.
 
Last edited:

gaijin

Banned
How so? It simply the Arab Spring of OTL with a new ideological base.

Because ideologies don't simply pop up like that. At present there are two main competing ideologies at work in the Arab world: Westernization and religious fundamentalism.

Westernization has been an ongoing process for several decades, possibly centuries. It's a well established pattern.

In counter to that there is a return to the roots, a denial of all outside influences, taking the form of religious revival with as one outcrop Islamic fundamentalism. This religious revival has been ongoing since the early 70's. You should keep in mind that this "return to the roots" is a natural response that has happened in other societies in similar situations as well (China in the 19th century for example) and as such can not be simply handwoven away.

Both of the above trends have millions of followers, institutions, movements, in short momentum to maintain them. Most importantly they have logic to them: Westernization because it is the desire to I'm mutate the richest most technologically advanced society and return to roots as a counter movement to this. They thrive because they fit in societal developments and offer answers to certain questions people are asking. (which is why socialism died in the Arab world: it was the answer to a question no one was asking). The main question being: how can we reverse the trend of falling behind the West. The simplest answers being "to copy them" or "to return to our pure traditions". Keep in mind that both answers seem to come up again and again and again in societies facing similar threats. There seems to be something in human psychology that makes these attractive answers.

Your Philosophy ex Machine will simply not work, because it lacks competitive power in the market place of ideas. People and societies simply don't work the way they should for your idea to be realistic.

Even if you move your start point back you will struggle to actually find a philosophy that carries enough emotional impact to compete against the big two. Socialism, communism, liberalism, lots of other isms, all failed to gain significant traction. I fail to see why your philosophy would do better.
 
Last edited:
Yeah, I realize the 90s might be a bit early what would you suggest is more suitable?

Perhaps get Arab nations to try out some Islamism earlier, and then once this fails, you may see Nasserist-esque secularism.

But such a POD is at risk of causing massive butterflies.
 
Top