Nice piece. Maybe, one reason that I can add could be the incapacity of this movement for really cohesionate people and interests. Islamic movements, on the other hand, are (and were) able to produce that union in a higher degree.
It is logical, and useful as "social cohesion glue", the anger after colonitzation, but once is over and while time is passing, that "enemy" that make us "together" lose his value. Also, the arabic aspect that you mentioned that included minories for the opposition to Islamic is not so strong, because at any time ethnic differences could start and "break the tie" of the arabic identity. (I mention arabic and regret of colonies, because are the key elements of "us/good" and "them/enemy/bad".)
Islam, with its universal doctrine doesn't have this problem. Islam is attractive to people in a similar way to democracys, because attack political power and elits in name of the government of "we, the people". Islam appeals to community. These works very well if there is poverty, inestability, chaos and repression (all ingredients of all the regimes that have been falling in the recent years, for many, many reasons). Also, it is in higher level that racial ethnicity (the kurds are an exception, we can say) and racial differences are subsumed on the shared identity of muslim (sunnies or chiis according to the case). The development on the region could be explained, on one factor (there are a lot), by difference in capacity of add people to their cause, making "less important" their differences, of the pan-arabist groups and islamic groups.
Nice piece. Maybe, one reason that I can add could be the incapacity of this movement for really cohesionate people and interests. Islamic movements, on the other hand, are (and were) able to produce that union in a higher degree.
It is logical, and useful as "social cohesion glue", the anger after colonitzation, but once is over and while time is passing, that "enemy" that make us "together" lose his value. Also, the arabic aspect that you mentioned that included minories for the opposition to Islamic is not so strong, because at any time ethnic differences could start and "break the tie" of the arabic identity. (I mention arabic and regret of colonies, because are the key elements of "us/good" and "them/enemy/bad".)
Islam, with its universal doctrine doesn't have this problem. Islam is attractive to people in a similar way to democracys, because attack political power and elits in name of the government of "we, the people". Islam appeals to community. These works very well if there is poverty, inestability, chaos and repression (all ingredients of all the regimes that have been falling in the recent years, for many, many reasons). Also, it is in higher level that racial ethnicity (the kurds are an exception, we can say) and racial differences are subsumed on the shared identity of muslim (sunnies or chiis according to the case). The development on the region could be explained, on one factor (there are a lot), by difference in capacity of add people to their cause, making "less important" their differences, of the pan-arabist groups and islamic groups.
Sorry for my English, I hope it is clear.