This is interesting, and poignant when it says "deepest values". How women being held in a state of "semi-slavery" as Fanon describes and "second class citiznes" as a deeply held value seems slightly contested to me, as I can't imagine all women in Arab society agreed with sexism and their position in society, however as someone once said, "when women are oppresed it's tradition, when men are oppressed its a tragedy." However, obviously I'm an outsider of Arab culture and much of what Fanon says holds true for many. Although an interesting counter-example is Zohra's mother and family, who were strongly anti-assimilation, but encouraged Zohra's education and independence and women's rights. Perhaps this audacity to exist as an absurdity of women's equality in the public sphere not jus private is connected to a certain level of critical thinking from higher levels of educational attainments of both parents, like in Zohra's family. Additionally, Zohra's mother used to work as a "semi-slave or servant" in her house, and her father only rejected it on basis of it not being fit for a woman of her class, so there's that additional aspect of what labor belongs to who being fluid on according to societal privileges not only including gender.

Interesting strategy, which actually gives power to the women of the society, and definitley the opposite in many western societies with patriarchy and men as head of household. Its a deeper look into their society than the surface level impression the Western media portrays with women who wear the veil being all opressed (to a degree that's much more significant compared to Europe).

Employment and its many benefits, in return for labor and "total submission"under European paternalism. For many, I imagine the choice of employment benefits and higher standard of living outweighed the alternate choices, however in the long term, with workers being an "admittedly overexploited but voluntary workforce", the system seems unsustainable for workers and requiring reform. It is a bit chilling how this description parallels the modern system still. For example in the next page, where it describes "the change in regime... from colonial-imperialist exploitation to white capitalist exploitation," seems to be the pattern of many countries simplified.

This was interesting to learn, as the impact of the war for Africans shifted from extraction and gaining only broken promises of improved quality of life, to actually having a positive impact on the struggle for African's independence. A social shift in public opinion is always important in mass movements, and I wonder how deeply the timeline for different countries' independence would change with less african participation in the war effort.

This is very noteworthy. Makes a lot of sense, although such a combined effort would need lots of focus and probably funding. Also interesting to note that the author use the pronoun "he" to describe the African historian.

I wonder why that is. What particular history that prevented this? In terms of proximity, Southern Africa is far but was still studied, but East Africa is somewhat close to the middle east in terms of Schoalrship and still understudied.

This is an interesting criticism. I wonder why they have worked in insolation? Is it because they did not have professional access to written historians, felt ignored by them, or did not want to work with them?

I havent heard this distinction between memory and oral tradition before, and never heard of it being held up as better than oral history, which I think is seen as more academically valid source/term.

This seems like a direct example of an alternate term to the vagueness of a "tribe" by western definitions, when certain identies are fluid and can change definitions.

This is interesting and kinda cool. Although a western nation couldn't conceive the less hierarchal power dynamics which can exist under a state. Not so surprising considering colonialism obsession with hierarchy and moral superiority.

This is interesting, and the first two parts of historical documentation and political negotiation make sense to me that can be in a cultural memory. I think of statues for example, but I am a bit more lost in imagining how its used in everyday problem solving.

It is definitely an oversight to not learn about colonial history before Europeans. Its not talked about, perhaps due to Eurocentrism, or maybe the idea that recent colonialism had a bigger impact than other forms?

I had never thought of that before, but now that its mentioned it does seem quite jarring. I think I've heard of regions or nations described as pre-colonial, but not entire continent besides Africa.

I feel like it's noteworthy that they stated this bluntly. I feel like many times when vocabulary is changed or when perspectives on certain assumed topics are re-engaged with, especially regarding marginalized groups, there is often an automatic pushback that the reasoning is superfluous under the bandwagon of political correctness. Instead of being seen as an update after recognizing a problem, sometimes some people see it as things people are making up reasons to be mad

I hadn't thought of that association before. I'd thought of primitive being negatively associated with tribes, but not the next step of actual conflicts being associated primitively.

I'm also curious to what the authors referring to here

I am not super familiar with this history, but interesting that the author mentions this. I guess its happened a lot?

Impeccable liberalism, liberalism being defined as willingness to respect or accept different beliefs or engage with new ideas, is definitely an inaccurate way to describe the hypothetical person the author writes about. The viewpoints of Africa are very much coming from a place rooted in stereotypes and seem to show an unwillingness to challenge conceived notions of Africa and listen to actual African's point of views.

"Romantic" is interesting considering that the previous descriptions of Africa seem negative, vs. romantic implies a positive connotation. I wonder if African "people" aren't written romantically, he means nature in Africa? Then "evocative" seems like a very good word to describe the hyperfocus on differences, because of "othering." There is a lack of focus on the less contrasting "mundane" or "avg" experiences of Africans, and with globalization might appear less and less disntictly "evocative" to outside eyes. Lastly, "unparticular" description seems to feed into the common negligent trope of Africa as 1 country, that strips and flattens its diversity.