Redundant Lebanese Thought

“An insight into why Lebanese history repeats itself”

      

  

  Any person that has lived in Lebanon for a few months, would sense that daily life eventually becomes quite mundane and repetitive. Even the avant-garde societal faction thinks in a highly one dimensional manner.  People do express their discomfort about their socio-political situation, but it ends there. They are incapable of changing it, not because they are not willing, but they are not able to.

                

Abraham Maslow said: “If the only tool you have is a hammer, you will tend to see all problems as a nail”. This is one of the reasons why we are stuck in a vicious cycle of discomfort in Lebanon, and the region in general. We have a limited repertoire of intellectual tools to deal with problems that arise in front of us.

               

  This scarcity in analytical tools is rooted in our deeply conservative mentality. In order to elaborate this hypothesis, you have to take into consideration the following factors.

1.       Intelligence

2.       Knowledge

3.       Execution

4.       Results

Intelligence is defined by Webster’s as "the ability to learn or understand or to deal with new or trying situations". Thus, in order to deal with situations adequately, we must be able to acquire relevant knowledge which is effective in dealing with those trying situations. At the same time, we also must be capable of using it.

However, before we get to the execution part, what does intelligence and knowledge have to do with being conservative? The answer is the influence of personality traits on learning and motivation.  Conservative individuals score very high on the closed minded personality trail measures, whereas liberal individuals are more open to new experiences and seek novel experiences and ideas.

Therefore if we are dealing with problems or trying situations intelligently, it would require from us to acquire new knowledge.  How will we be capable of doing so if we cannot overcome our bias and thought preference? Moreover, even if we are capable of acquiring that knowledge, will we be willing to change what we are extremely accustomed to?

I believe that the preceding argument is indicative of why we are incapable of proper execution of change. Moreover, it provokes an endless loop of melancholic thought and behavior. The results may be quite grim; however, it doesn't mean that change isn't possible. It is, but it requires too much damn effort.  

An easier method of change would be to stop pursuing change consciously, because the means are producing redundant results, which in turn are keeping the progress wheel stagnant.  Since we are a conservative nation, we would be more at ease if we accept the current decadent culture, and learn how to work its dynamics more efficiently. Eventually things will change if we truly find out that we can’t live in such a system, because change then would be much more synergetic and has profound natural momentum and direction.

However, the irony of the matter is, as long as change is required, liberal thought will also be required. But Liberal thought will always create discomfort in conservative nations. Therefore the fate of the Lebanese will remain the same due to their conservative identity with liberal whims. 

Making Things Work in Different Mediums

A few months back I read a book called "The 22 Immutable Laws of Branding" and there as a section about the internet and how communication is shifting from the traditional medium "broadcast and print" to, well, the internet.

I remembered this today while Mr. Nasri Atallah, the author of the blog "Our Man in Beirut" was talking about his blogging experience, how it evolved, and why and how it turned into a book. As you have noticed, his blog talked mainly about Beirut and his perception of it. So why is relevant to the main topic ? Other than the obvious reason that he has experienced success on an online medium and is now trying to shift to a more traditional one, I believe that it is important to see why he did so and to what extent would he have success.

Why the shift ?

Getting published usually in the pre-internet era had to do mostly with credibility when it comes to the author, it was used to build credibility about a certain topic, for when you get published most people would get the sense that you are an expert in that field. However Mr. Atallah got published because he was credible due to his online audience, however it is most likely the shift occurred based on self-esteem or self-actualization needs on the behalf of Mr. Atallah, and I believe he mentioned that motive in an indirect manner while he was talking about the issue. Therefore, the shift from the online medium to the more traditional medium had nothing to do with which is the more successful one in terms of communication.

Will his shift be successful ?

There is no doubt that the man has had a lot of success when it comes to blogging, however I don't believe that his book will have as much success because the audiences are different. Some might argue that the book audience is not so different because the theme "Beirut" is still the same, and that was Mr. Atallah's argument. However, the motives and the consumer behavior of each is very different, people who are more likely to read blogs are less likely to take the initiative to go to a book store, pay and read something which is found online for free. Whereas book readers seek out authors differently and in a more ordered and structured way. Therefore I can't see for the book the same success that the blog has had for different mechanics go into buying or reading each. At best the book will be a collector's item for someone who is passionate about Nasri's blog work, and in case sales spike in the near future, it will be no more than a fad. and one piece of advice to Mr. Atallah, I suggest you stick with the medium that got you where you are, if you stop blogging your following will decrease dramatically, however there is a possibility that my analogy is inaccurate but I still think the reasoning behind it is sound.