Samir Sadiq, Othman Ly
What is the relationship between the citizen and the homeland? The relationship is most material and less moral, The practical form of this relationship is the formula of rights and duties, Most of the relationship has a vertical axis, meaning it is historical and its evaluation requires studying the past and present and preparing for a better future, Part of it has a horizontal axis, meaning it deals with an immediate evaluation of the relationship, Each axis is made up of several components that differ from each other in quantity and quality, In order for the relationship between the homeland and the citizen to be fruitful, most of this relationship must be definable, materially evaluated and measurable,Part of the relationship can be moral, in which case its evaluation is purely personal. The moral relationship alone cannot organize the relationship between the homeland and the citizen in a productive way, The material aspect is necessary, so that integration between the material and the moral occurs, and its presence varies as proportions from one people to another and from one time to another.
The positive relationship between the citizen and the homeland is called “citizenship,” and this relationship reaches its highest sublimity when it transforms into something resembling a civil religion for the state, The word “religion” only means giving the homeland metaphorically a character resembling sanctity, Civility means distancing every function in the state from religious sanctity, and this is in contrast to the metaphorical sanctification of the homeland, which is different from the sanctification of parties, employees, presidents, leaders, princes, kings, etc. The metaphorical sanctification of the homeland increases with the decrease in the sanctification of individuals and their functions,A soldier may die for the homeland, but it is not permissible for a soldier to die for a person, Personalizing the homeland is a fatal thing for it, and it is what turns the homeland, in the best cases, into a “homeland,” that is, a place of residence, a hotel, or something similar.
Under dictatorship, the homeland descends into a mere dwelling place, During times of dictatorship, which negate the relationship between the homeland and the citizen in its moral and objective material aspects, the homeland slips into a pre-state form, that is, into a tribal or familial form, and is transformed into a private farm that assumes the form of a state, In a farm, there is no social contract, but rather the will of the individual owner of the farm,The social contract regulates the relationships of people with each other and with the ruling authority, and transforms the groups that live next to each other into a society whose members live together in mutual support and solidarity, Failure to achieve this means the end of the state and the beginning of a pre-state system, that is, the system of the clan or tribe. Unfortunately, most Arab groups live in the system of the clan and tribe, that is, in a pre-state system!
The state is not based on one man, that is, it is not based on one person, Therefore, it can be said that the saying “the founder of the state” is invalid and cannot be proven true, One person may have a greater role than another, but the cooperative state is not a “personal” state, but rather a society’s state.
All the complexities and obstacles to building a cooperative, mutually supportive, and solidarity-based state are found in Arab countries, In Syria, for example, we also find a horrific reduction of the state and a suspicious inflation of the individual, The course of events in Syria should have taken the opposite direction, The state should have absorbed the regime, the regime should have absorbed the authority, the authority should have absorbed the party or parties, the party should have absorbed the sect, the sect should have absorbed the tribe, the tribe should have absorbed the family, and the family should have absorbed the individual, What happened, however, was that the individual absorbed everything, even the state, which shrank and became an appendage to the individual. Syria evolved over approximately half a century into Assad’s Syria, and a year ago, it began to evolve into al-Julani’s Syria, Assad was the one who swallowed the state project, and al-Julani swallowed it with record speed,,Al-Julani was able to swallow Syria with such speed for many reasons, including those related to his religious mentality, which considers the homeland an idol that must be destroyed, And swallowing the homeland practically means destroying it,Also, Al-Julani’s political illiteracy and internationalism, including his contempt for the people through childish methods such as promoting his electronic flies the hypothesis that more than 80% of the Syrian people are Sunnis, and all Sunnis stand behind him because he is Sunni, meaning that the state is a religious sectarian entity like the Umayyad Caliphate. What is strange about the Umayyads was their bringing in tens of thousands of Uyghur, Chechen, and other mercenaries to liberate the country, despite the fact that 80% of Syrians stood with the new Umayyads, and despite the fact that what was called liberation was not done through military battles, but rather through an international plot, After the liberation, the work of the internal and external mercenaries began to commit massacres from the coast to the south, and if the mercenaries had been able, they would have committed massacres in the east and the north. There are many other points that require detailed research, What was mentioned was a very brief summary of what happened in recent months.