Connect with us

Politics

Adel Hadjami: Loving or hating reality does not change its essence

Dr. Adel Hadjami, a professor of philosophy at Mohammed V University in Rabat, affirms that the term “postmodernism” carries a profound meaning

Published

on

Dr. Adel Hadjami, a professor of philosophy at Mohammed V University in Rabat, affirms that the phrase “postmodernism” carries a great meaning, as it is a general classification into which some lovers of labels place everything they do not understand in the contemporary world, in art, architecture, clothing, music, values, and also philosophy.

He asked, "What is the task of philosophy?" To answer: Among the possible answers given by previous philosophers is that it is an experience of "achieving awareness of what is happening in reality," and the present is trying to be aware of itself, its components and its causes; because awareness of reality requires describing it as it is, and when we turn to describing the reality of the world today, we notice that it is a reality different from all that preceded it. The concepts of identity, belonging, essence, unity and consistency are all, practically, no longer help in describing what is happening, as the image of the consciousness of contemporary man and the pattern of his existence is no longer essential or unified. He explained that the contemporary Arab citizen is a global being who thinks and communicates in overlapping languages, with people of multiple nationalities and virtual or real affiliations. He writes Arabic in Latin letters, for example, and eats Japanese sushi in Rabat, or Chinese shumen in Riyadh. Today we are mixed and hybrid, in a world that is a generalized Babel, and this has led to breaking the "traditional" extensions in the meaning of belonging, culture and values.

He added: My son, who was born in the middle of the first decade after the year 2000, is closer than I am to a child of the same age living in South Korea. He is a child of the seventies of the last century, and this is a great transformation compared to our generation and the generation before it, as the son was “his father’s secret” and the grandson was repeating the lifestyle and thinking of his tenth grandfather, and the values, beliefs and convictions of his tribe. This matter is general for everything, and when the philosopher seeks to describe this and explain the decline of the concepts of belonging and identity, he is not “calling for” or “preaching” anything theoretically, he is only describing a reality that is happening “practically”.

He emphasized that we may love or hate reality, perhaps even oppose it and call for "resistance" to it. However, describing reality as it is has no bearing on love or hate, for "reality does not rise above," and whether you love it or hate it does not alter its objective truth, no matter how much this truth wounds our convictions and shatters the frameworks of our subjective judgment. He added: To say of a philosopher who describes what is happening as a "modern existence" that transcends and shatters the traditional conception built by the modern era regarding the meaning of reason, identity, and belonging, and that the most appropriate way to understand it is to resort to a different concept—a "postmodern" mode of existence—is like saying of this philosopher, or of Lyotard, for example, that he is "postmodern," just as you would say of someone who tells you the earth is round that he is "spherical," or that when you dislike the implications of this fact for your convictions, you dislike the earth's roundness because it "disturbs your convictions.".

The man of ideology. Hadjami pointed out that when a philosopher works on “naming” reality, he seeks to understand what is happening, with the tools available to him, and he does not call for anything, except to be a man of ideology, and this is something different from philosophy. The true philosopher is - considering the purely philosophical level - a man who does not “want” anything in reality, or rather, he “does not know anything” in advance. He is a man who constantly reviews, repeats, and changes his questions before the answers. This is very far from the preacher who ends up with an answer and considers it the conclusion, so all that remains for him is to defend what he has reached. Herein lies the main difference between the logic of preaching and the logic of philosophy.

The commentator on Gilles Deleuze does not believe, in principle, that it is sound to promote something called Derrida, for example, or Deleuze, because these figures do not adhere to any "doctrines." Or rather, the only possible content of their doctrine is what we find in Nietzsche's famous fragment, "I hate to lead others as much as I hate to be led by others." As for the term "philosophy of difference," such a label holds little value, and it is not appropriate to group such names together under one heading, unless the context is one of wishing to avoid the effort of understanding—something that the thoughtful thinker would find abhorrent.

My son, born in the early 2000s, is closer than I am to a child living in South Korea

Related News

The Saudi News Network first launched on Twitter via its official account, @SaudiNews50, and quickly became one of the Kingdom's leading independent news sources, thanks to its fast and reliable coverage of major local and international events. Due to the growing trust of its followers, the network expanded by launching its website, a comprehensive news platform offering regularly updated content in the fields of politics, economics, health, education, and national events, presented in a professional style that meets the public's expectations. The network strives to enhance public awareness and provide accurate information in a timely manner through on-the-ground reporting, in-depth analysis, and a specialized editorial team, making it a trusted source for anyone seeking up-to-the-minute Saudi news.

Politics

Israel assassinates Reza Khazai, Hezbollah's military buildup chief

The Israeli army announces the assassination of Reza Khazaee, Hezbollah’s military buildup chief and a Quds Force commander, in a raid on Beirut that targeted Iranian supply lines.

Published

on

Israel assassinates Reza Khazai, Hezbollah's military buildup chief

The Israeli army officially announced today (Tuesday) the success of the assassination operation of Reza Khazaee, who is considered one of the most prominent pivotal figures in the military structure of Hezbollah, describing him as the official in charge of the “military build-up” file in the party, and the field representative of the Quds Force of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard in Lebanon.

In detailing the operation, the army statement explained that the Israeli Navy, in close coordination with Military Intelligence (Aman), carried out a focused airstrike yesterday (Monday) on an area in the Lebanese capital, Beirut. This strike resulted in the death of Khazaee, whom the statement revealed also held another sensitive position: Chief of Staff of the Iranian-backed "Lebanon Corps," making him a strategic target in Israel's target bank.

According to the intelligence cited in the statement, Khaza'i was considered the "right-hand man" of the commander of the Lebanese Corps and an indispensable central figure in Hezbollah's military buildup. His tasks focused primarily on logistical and strategic coordination between the party and Tehran, particularly regarding aligning the party's field military needs with the resources and technologies provided by Iran—a process known as "military buildup.".

Context of escalation and targeting of shadow leaders

This operation comes within the context of an intensive Israeli military and security campaign against Hezbollah's command structure and Iranian supply networks in the region. The term "military buildup" typically refers in Israeli military parlance to efforts to transfer and develop advanced weaponry, such as precision missiles, drones, and air defense systems—issues that Tel Aviv considers a red line that threatens the regional balance of power.

The targeting of a figure as influential as Reza Khazaee, who serves as a direct link to the Revolutionary Guard, reflects Israel's determination to strike at the "vital artery" that sustains Hezbollah's military capabilities. By eliminating key figures involved in liaison and military logistics, Israel seeks to cripple supply chains and disrupt military modernization plans that rely heavily on Iranian expertise and funding.

Regional dimensions of the operation

This assassination cannot be separated from the broader regional context, where a covert and overt war is being waged between Israel and the Iranian-led axis. Khazaee exemplifies the kind of commanders who operate behind the scenes to consolidate fronts and unify military efforts between Tehran and its proxies in the region. The Quds Force, which Khazaee represented, is the external arm of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) responsible for operations outside Iran's borders, thus giving his assassination a dimension that extends beyond the Lebanese arena to the very heart of Tehran's strategic calculations.

Observers believe that intensifying the strikes in Beirut and targeting figures responsible for coordination, financing, and arming is aimed at putting military and political pressure on Hezbollah, in light of the ongoing confrontations on the northern border, and an attempt to reduce the party’s ability to replenish its strategic stockpile of weapons in the event of a full-scale confrontation.

Continue Reading

Politics

Why did Iran reject Trump's nuclear deal? Details of the Wytkopf negotiations

US envoy Steve Wittkopf revealed the behind-the-scenes details of the failure of nuclear negotiations with Iran, and Tehran's rejection of Trump's offer to provide nuclear fuel in exchange for halting enrichment before the latest escalation.

Published

on

Why did Iran reject Trump's nuclear deal? Details of the Wytkopf negotiations

Amid the rapidly evolving situation in the Middle East, and as the joint US-Israeli military operations against targets in Iran entered their fourth day, new and sensitive details have emerged regarding the diplomatic maneuvering that preceded this dangerous escalation. US Special Envoy Steve Wittkopf revealed the behind-the-scenes events of the final hours of the stalled nuclear negotiations between Washington and Tehran during an exclusive interview with Fox News on Tuesday.

Enrichment node and external fuel supply

Wittkopf explained that the core point of contention that led to the collapse of the talks centered on the "right to enrichment." According to the US envoy, the Iranian negotiators began the sessions by firmly asserting their country's sovereign right to enrich uranium domestically. In response, the US delivered a resolute message from President Donald Trump stating that he possessed the right and the capability to halt this process if it threatened international security.

Witkoff revealed that the US administration, in a last-ditch effort to defuse the crisis, presented what it called a "fair deal." The offer included allowing Iran to obtain all its nuclear fuel needs for peaceful purposes and energy generation from reliable external sources, in exchange for abandoning enrichment activities within Iranian territory. However, Tehran categorically rejected this offer, leading the US side to conclude that the other party had no genuine intention of making substantial concessions.

The historical roots of the nuclear file crisis

To understand the dimensions of this rejection, one must consider the historical context of the Iranian nuclear conflict, which has persisted for over two decades. Tehran has consistently argued that abandoning domestic enrichment would make it beholden to the political will of fuel-supplying nations, citing past experiences where energy supplies were disrupted. Conversely, the international community, led by the United States, believes that Iran's possession of a complete nuclear fuel cycle (uranium enrichment) would significantly reduce the "breakout time" required to produce a nuclear weapon—a red line that Washington and Tel Aviv seek to prevent.

The withdrawal of the United States from the nuclear agreement (JCPOA) in 2018 marked a turning point, as Tehran gradually increased enrichment levels beyond previously permitted limits, further complicating the negotiating landscape and making a return to square one extremely difficult.

Regional and international repercussions of the failure of negotiations

The failure of this round of negotiations and the rejection of the American "deal" was not merely a passing diplomatic event, but rather the spark that paved the way for the current military escalation. This development carries serious implications for regional security, as Israel views the Iranian nuclear program as an existential threat with which it cannot coexist. Furthermore, the failure of diplomatic solutions reinforces the likelihood of a nuclear arms race in the region, as other countries may seek to acquire similar capabilities to ensure a balance of power.

Analysts assert that the deadlock in negotiations reflects a deep trust gap between the two sides, and presents the region with open scenarios ranging from the continuation of limited military operations to a slide towards a comprehensive confrontation that could redraw the geopolitical map of the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Politics

The US is urging its citizens to leave 12 Middle Eastern countries immediately

Washington orders its citizens to leave 12 Middle Eastern countries and closes its embassies in Saudi Arabia and Kuwait, amid military escalation, fears of a wider regional war, and disruption to energy supplies.

Published

on

The US is urging its citizens to leave 12 Middle Eastern countries immediately

In a rapidly evolving geopolitical situation in the region, the US State Department issued an urgent and decisive directive for its citizens to immediately leave more than 12 countries in the Middle East. This decision comes amid an unprecedented escalation of direct military confrontation between the United States and Israel on one side, and Iran on the other, threatening to expand the conflict to multiple fronts.

Details of warnings and evacuation procedures

Assistant Secretary of State for Consular Affairs Maura Namdar explained that the increased security risks necessitate the immediate departure of American citizens using available commercial transportation. The list of countries included in the warnings comprised Bahrain, Egypt, Iran, Iraq, Israel, the West Bank, Gaza, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Syria, the United Arab Emirates, and Yemen. Simultaneously, the State Department ordered the departure of non-essential government personnel and their families from its missions in Bahrain, Iraq, and Jordan as a precautionary measure for their protection.

In a move reflecting the seriousness of the situation, the United States announced the closure of several of its embassies in Arab countries until further notice, specifically in Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The US embassy in Amman, Jordan, also saw its staff temporarily evacuated due to a “security threat,” the nature of which was not disclosed. Meanwhile, an interagency emergency task force was activated in Washington to manage the crisis and coordinate responses.

Background of the conflict and its regional effects

This diplomatic and security mobilization follows a series of airstrikes launched by the United States and Israel last Saturday against strategic targets inside Iran, which, according to sources, resulted in the deaths of several senior Iranian leaders, including Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei. Tehran responded by targeting American and Israeli sites and interests, as well as targets in Iraq and the Gulf Cooperation Council countries, putting the entire region on a knife's edge.

Economic repercussions and global concerns

The repercussions of this escalation are not limited to the military and political spheres; they extend to the global economy. Energy markets have witnessed a significant price surge, driven by fears of disruptions to oil supplies. These fears are amplified by threats from Iranian officials to close the Strait of Hormuz or target ships transiting it. The Strait of Hormuz is a vital artery for the global economy, with millions of barrels of crude oil passing through it daily, and any disruption to navigation there could lead to a severe global energy crisis.

For his part, US President Donald Trump stated that this conflict could last for a period of four to five weeks, with the possibility of it continuing for a longer period, indicating that the region is heading towards a phase of instability that could reshape the political and security map of the Middle East.

Continue Reading

Trending News