Bader Al-Abri.
Culture is a comprehensive and multifaceted construct intrinsically tied to the dynamics of human society, and is therefore inseparable from the human experience. As defined by Edward Tylor (d. 1917), it is “the complex whole which includes knowledge, beliefs, art, morals, law, customs, and any other capabilities and habits acquired by man as a member of society.” Culture cannot be removed from this dynamic concept. To confine it within closed loopis to undermine the beauty of its diversity; likewise, to subject it to political interests extracts it from its natural processes of interaction and cross-cultural exchange, pushing it instead toward conflict and hatred. And it narrows when it is theologically closed and politically.
Since culture is linked to human beings, it is inherently connected to the principle of beauty. Beauty does not take a single form, and the greater the variety of its forms, the more its positive effects are manifested on humankind. The various cultural forms—ethnic, linguistic, religious, sectarian, artistic—are manifestations of this beauty. Culture cannot be confined geographically; it transcends national borders because it belongs to humanity. The cultural and intellectual space of human beings cannot be constrained by national limits whose primary purpose is state administration. In today’s digital world, culture has become accessible to all. Attempts to politicize it, or to confine it geographically, resemble efforts to restrict the waters of vast oceans. One may set territorial waters boundaries, but what swims within these waters moves freely beyond them. Likewise, culture today, especially in the digital age, recognizes no boundaries.
There is a clear distinction between investing in culture and politicizing culture. Investing in culture means engaging it positively and uniformly, enabling it to contribute to development, diversity, and national stability. Politicization, however, ties culture to immediate political interests or benefits. At times, politics fuels conflict among cultural groups so that society becomes preoccupied with internal cultural disputes—allowing certain individuals to retain power for longer. At other times, the state elevates a specific culture for religious, sectarian, tribal, or social reasons, inevitably leading to the deliberate marginalization of other cultures within the same national borders. This may lead to the extinction of certain cultural diversity or to the intensification of conflict during periods of political weakness. Thus, instead of enabling cultural interaction and investment, politicization results in the cultural conflict.
In principle, culture within a nation-state should stand equally across all groups, because citizenship in the modern state is grounded in equality and justice—both in individual identity and in cultural affiliations tied to that identity. For this reason, culture is broader and higher than political authority; it represents a human belonging to the homeland, whereas authority is an administrative, shifting mechanism whose purpose is to protect human dignity, preserve identity, and ensure equality and justice. When political authority deviates from its organizational purpose and becomes a barrier to cultural equality, the role of the intellectual emerges in to observe and critique authority, guiding it back to the right and optimal path aligned with cultural interaction. Cultural exchange and interaction are a natural, historical, and human phenomenon, where cultures interact, merge with one another, evolve, or sometimes disappear. Political authority finds its rightful place only when it invests in this diversity positively, under fair and just laws that maintain this natural cultural dynamism.
The nation-state cannot be tied to a single culture, nor can it impose one culture on its people—especially in states with diverse cultural patterns, such as sectarian, ethnic, linguistic, or social differences. The overarching national identity must be broad enough to include all identities and cultures. The more inclusive and open this identity is, the greater the internal stability, enabling genuine coexistence that transcends mere adherence to the rule of law.
And beyond the framework of the state, within the broader human sphere, we must build mindsets capable of positive engagement with the world’s cultural diversity. Cultural differences stem primarily from environmental factors, not from inherent human nature. It is the environment that shapes one’s language, religion, sect, clothing, cuisine, and arts. Attachment to one’s culture is largely environmental, not rooted in the absolute essence of humanity. Today, due to global openness, people experience cultural diversity more closely than ever before. Societies must therefore learn to coexist naturally with cultural difference.
When newspapers, magazines, radio, and cinema emerged, Western media sought to politicize culture by promoting Western culture as synonymous with civilizational progress. To appear “advanced,” one was encouraged to adopt a Westernized identity. This media-driven approach marginalized other cultures—even within Western societies themselves—as seen in the erasure of Native American culture in the United States or attempts to suppress Latin American cultures, particularly in countries opposing American imperialism. Yet this narrative has faded with the rise of new global economic powers possessing distinct cultures of their own. These nations advanced not because they adopted Western politicized culture, but because they understood that civilizational progress—economic, developmental, and otherwise—is governed by universal laws unrelated to cultural affiliation.
This same pattern applies to many Arab nation-states, which historically politicized culture due to their tight control over local media—written, visual, and audio. But this influence has weakened today with the digital revolution, which empowered individuals and independent media institutions. As a result, diverse cultural expressions that were previously marginalized have re-emerged within the modern nation-state.
