When Arabization poses a threat to Morocco's interests (Stadium: Mohamed Boudhan)
1. A comprehensive and sweeping localization:
Under strong ideological and political pressure from the "national movement," the Arabization of Morocco after "independence" took the form of blackmailing the state. Since independence, the latter has engaged, with great enthusiasm, in a comprehensive and sweeping Arabization process, including:
The political Arabization initiated by France, which aims to spread and consolidate the conviction among Moroccans that their state is Arab and ruled by an Arab authority.
Ethnic Arabization, which also aims to spread and consolidate the conviction among Moroccans that they are an “Arab” people of Arab origin.
Identity Arabization , which also aims to spread and consolidate the conviction among Moroccans that Morocco is an Arab country with Arab affiliation.
Ideological Arabization , which aims to create a false awareness among Moroccans, entrenches and perpetuates their dependence on the Arab Mashreq at the level of belonging, culture, art, religion (sects, jurisprudence, and fatwas), language, unity of issues and destiny…, until this Arab Mashreq has become like a fixed star around which Morocco revolves as a small planet that derives its existence and movement from The Great Eastern Star.
As for the fifth aspect of this comprehensive and sweeping Arabization, as I said, it is the linguistic Arabization whose implementation, in its comprehensive and sweeping form, will be delayed until the eighties of the last century. Why? Because spreading, teaching, and using the Arabic language has never been the goal of Arabization. Rather, Arabic has always been just a means of political, ethnic, identity and ideological Arabization.
This comprehensive and sweeping Arabization made Morocco lose its identity sovereignty represented by its Amazigh African affiliation, and created an extremist Arab awareness among a group of Moroccans that transformed them into “mtabe’in” and “mtabe’in” (to find out what is meant by “hybridization”, see the topic: “Tabe’iba” in criminalization “Normalization” are emotionally related to the issues and problems of the Arab Mashreq more than they are to the issues and problems of their country.
2. The dangers of Arabization of Morocco’s interests:
But the danger of this extremist “hypocritical” Arab awareness, which Arabization has implanted in the minds of many Moroccans, will move from the level of violating the identity sovereignty of Morocco to the level of contradicting its interests and security, when the hostile and inflammatory discourse of a group of these “hybrids” coincides (by opening the baa and then breaking it). against their country, on the occasion of the visit of the Israeli Defense Minister to Morocco starting on November 23, 2021, with the same hostile and inflammatory rhetoric, which Algeria promotes against the territorial integrity of their country, Morocco.
When we compare the judgment on Morocco’s normalization of its relations with Israel as “foolishness,” as stated in the words of Mr. Muhammad al-Sassi, who is calculated on the eased movement; Considering this normalization as “new colonialism,” as Bensalem Himmich said, who is also considered to be the group of the freedmen; And the claim that “the policy of normalization depends on the issue of the country’s sovereignty because the decision is no longer in our hands and our sovereignty is robbed from us,” as stated by Nabila Mounib, the chief Moroccan facilitator; Mr. Raissouni, who is described as a Makassed jurist, and who is the head of the so-called International Union of Muslim Scholars, described the agreements signed by Morocco with Israel as “a policy of seeking help from the enemy state, the occupying state, aggression and criminality,” and saying that his country, Morocco, asked for “Zionist help, at the expense of Jerusalem.” and Palestine”, and that this constitutes the behavior of humiliation under the tutelage of Zionism; And his declaration that Morocco’s official relations “are now completely immersed in forbidden love with the Zionist enemy,” from which he will gain “nothing but penetration and involvement.
And the statement of the “Union of Muslim Scholars” headed by the same Mr. Raissouni, which stated that the alliances that Morocco and the Emirates made “with the occupying Zionist entity are a condemned and forbidden act and a betrayal of the age, righteousness and the rights of the Palestinian people” (when we compare the sayings of these) Al-Madba’een” Moroccans) and between the statements and statements of Algerian officials who repeat that Algeria is facing the Zionists on the western borders, and that Morocco’s appeal to them will not benefit it in the face of Algeria’s power (!), we will notice a congruence between the two speeches, to the extent that Mr. Raissouni was not embarrassed to repeat the same contents of the speech Hostile and provocative for Algeria, and for the same false slanders, and for the same diabolical terminology of Morocco due to the normalization of its relations with Israel, to be used by him also, and for the same reason, against his country.
”? Let us ask Mr. Raissouni: Who practices the “amour contre nature
The one who loves the original collective identity of his country and preserves his natural and original affiliation, or the one who pretends to belong to a foreign group identity and disavows his own sex and loves another different race, thus practicing homosexuality - that is,
”? national and identities - represents the pinnacle of “forbidden love
Then who exercises employment and makes customers? Is he loyal to his country through his loyalty to the collective identity of this country created by collective belonging to the same country, which defends its sovereignty, independence, and distinction from the identities of other peoples, or is he the one who excludes the identity of his country and strives to attach it, as a servile vassal, to the identities of foreign countries thousands of kilometers separate us from them, and promotes For its corrupt and stagnant ideological goods, from Wahhabism, Brotherhood and Arabism, thus expressing his loyalty to external parties, exercising, in terms of effects and
? results, free labor for these parties without asking him to do so
It is clear that the hostile and inflammatory stances of these “hypocrites” (always by opening the baa and then breaking it) against their country due to normalization, which coincide with the positions of the foreign parties hostile to Morocco, highlight that the ideology of Arabization, from which they draw their hostile and incendiary positions, is an ideological rather than a national one. It produces intellectuals who oppose the interests and security of their country, just as Algeria's stances against the territorial integrity of Morocco oppose its interests and security.
? 3. Why freedom of expression to defend only Arab causes
Rejecting this hostile and incendiary discourse, which these Moroccans promote against their Morocco, does not mean rejecting their right to criticize their state's decisions, their right to freedom of expression and opinion, and disagreement with the state's policy. But why should this criticism always be focused on decisions related to Palestine and Arab issues, such as the issue of normalization with Israel? Why didn't Mr. Raissouni write that a twenty-year sentence for those who demanded freedom, justice and dignity is a condemned and forbidden act? Why did he not declare that Morocco's normalization of its relations with Spain, which occupies parts of its lands, is an indulgence in "forbidden love" at the expense of Ceuta and Melilla? Why didn't he say that hiring by contract is an illegal act? Why did he not denounce the delay in the real and serious activation of the Amazigh officialdom, and declare that it is an act?
Why did he not issue a statement, in the name of the union that he chairs, condemning the rampant corruption in Morocco and
? expressing that it is forbidden by Sharia
With these examples, we want to show that there are a thousand Moroccan cases and cases, it was first for Mr. Raissouni and other “stragglers” (always by opening the b and then breaking it), if he was jealous of the issues of his country, to criticize the state’s policy regarding them.
As for the fact that this criticism does not appear, in a hostile and inflammatory form, except when it comes to Moroccan decisions that are interpreted as not directly serving the Palestinian cause and other Arab issues, this is what proves that what drives these “hypocrites” to condemn these decisions is their ethnic Arabism instilled in them. Arabization, in the sense that was previously explained, is in their hearts and souls until their loyalty to these Arab causes has become a rooted belief and a firm belief, with the duty to provide proof on every occasion to renew this loyalty by denying their Amazigh identity and completely ignoring the issues of Morocco and Moroccans.
4. State Responsibility:
But we should not bear all the responsibility in this opposition to the cooperation agreement between Morocco and Israel, from which (the opposition) benefits the enemies of the territorial integrity, the agents of foreign ideologies, backward and extremist, such as Mr. Raissouni and other “hypocrites” (always opening the baa and then breaking it). The state bears the largest share in the spread of the culture of “hypocrisy” in which the ideological organs of the state, such as the school, the mosque, the media, and the administration… have charged the minds of Moroccans, and instilled in them disavowal their Amazigh identity and national issues, and their madness in the issues of Arabism, and questioning the decisions of their state when these decisions do not serve These are Arab issues. It is true that, after independence, the state faced strong political pressure in the direction of a comprehensive and sweeping Arabization and “hypocrisy,” which was countered by the systematic exclusion of the Amazigh language, claiming that it was a relic of colonialism.
If the state has temporarily benefited from the policy of Arabization and “hybridization” by using this policy to control balances and confront its political opponents with the same oriental ideology with which they opposed the state, as is evident in its adoption of national issues and then of Wahhabi Islamic thought for which the doors of Morocco opened to confront political Islam, However, it will then become a hostage to the oriental ideologies that the policy of Arabization facilitated its spread in Morocco, as we note that day when it concluded security and military agreements with Israel, which angered the custodians of the Eastern temple in Morocco. Which shows that the policy of Arabization, in its political, ethnic, identity and ideological sense, has become a threat to Morocco’s interests and national security, when it opposes these interests and security, in the name of Arabization ideology, imbued with this ideology that the state itself has spent a lot of money to spread and plant in Morocco.
There is no way to get rid of this non-national Arabist ideology except by spreading and planting a culture of love for the land and linking to it by linking to the collective identity that this land has created, which is the Amazigh identity. This requires quite a bit of time, because changing what is intellectual and ideological is not as easy as changing what is material and tangible.
http://www.portail-amazigh.com/2021/12/20.html