It’s a good article on multi-layered identity, and makes accurate observations and counterpoints.
But I disagree on some matters.
🟥 The total inclusivity and abstraction of Phoenician identity as a meta-culture, is a modern (tolerant) idealogical interpretation.
Canaanites aren’t known to have been inclusive to nearby cultures. They were regional, urban, dynastic and city-based, not modern inclusive civic nationalists.
Therefore, turning Phoenicia into a pluralist Lebanese meta-culture is a modern ideological construction, not a direct continuation of ancient heritage.
🟥 Mohammedan Islam, is generally like an intrusive, foreign species, that destroys local cultures.
Islam itself destroyed Arab Paganism, have you seen one Muslim identify as a Modern Muslim and an Arab Pagan, or continue Jahliyah funeral rites of his ancestors?
Mohammad says: He who follows the traditions of his pagan father, shall be made to bite on his father’s private member, in an authentic hadeeth.
مَنْ تَعَزَّى بِعَزَاءِ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ، فَأَعِضُّوهُ بِهَنِ أَبِيهِ، وَلَا تَكْنُوا.
🟥 Multiple faces creates hypocrisy and loose identities.
In the case of Asian countries (e.g Indonesia), the Indonesian Muslims wear Arabic clothes, use Arabic names and have mostly lost older traditions, even when they are mostly clueless to Islam itself as non-Arabs, some even also identify as Indonesian Nationalists at the same time.
🟥 Separatists aren’t necessarily wrong because identity can be layered.
Many successful European nations are separated, albeit very similar, and are successful.
Norway, Denmark, and Sweden are closely related Scandinavian societies with overlapping histories, languages, and Lutheran heritage, yet each has preserved independent statehood.
The Lebanese separatist argues, the institutions failed precisely because the society lacks a shared national loyalty strong enough to sustain them.
In Conclusion: If there’s a Phoenician meta-culture, and it’s very loose, it doesn’t then provide a workable hegemony.