Evil aliens have decided to kill everyone on Earth! Fortunately, they've given you two minutes to save as many as you can. All you have to do is name a country to save everyone in it.
Palestine is recognized as a country by the United Nations so technically Palestine is a country. Although countries such as the United States and Canada believe Palestine is not a country.
palestine is a country? recognised by majority of countries, and already an observer state in the UN - definitely on its way to achieving member status as long as it sorts itself out
@canadadry By what standards is Palestine more of a country than the US or Canada? The latter two have global recognition, full autonomy over their territory, and clearly defined borders and leadership.
Palestine has mixed recognition (and even many of those that do recognize it nominally don't really treat it like a country), limited autonomy, unclear borders and fractured and uncertain political control.
If you say the US and Canada are illegitimate because they are "settler-colonial states," what framework do we use to judge that? Vietnam is almost entirely on territory colonized and settled by the Vietnamese, whose homeland in southern China was similarly colonized and settled by the Chinese. Turkey was famously settled by the Turks, who displaced and often genocided the prior Christian inhabitants. Similarly, much Palestinian ancestry itself comes from the imperial settling by Arabs from the Umayyad Caliphate on.
So this is just history - populations have changed and moved.
@woshiwaiguoren settler colonialism is different from what youre describing. what china did to vietnam, or the umayyad caliphate to israel, is conquest, what turkey did to greeks/armenians/kurds is genocide.
the state of israel on the other hand has the stated purpose of replacing palestinian people in israel with "jewish people" even tho many palestinians are jewish. on top of the fact that israel has continuously acted at the behest of the west its fair to see why people call it settler colonialism. palestinian people have lived in what is now israel for a very long time and saying that they are the result of umayyad settler colonialism is ridiculous considering that what is considered a "palestinian" genetically has lived in palestine for 1000s of years
plus implying that america and canada arent settler colonial states is weird. literally the entire history of those countries are settling once indigenous lands with the political backing of their respective governments.
I don't think it was about implying that US/Canada weren't settler colonies, more of just saying that that is how the populations originated and how that doesn't impact whether it is a country or not
Most of them are countries that speak Arabic. Or some dialect of Arabic, anyway. That doesn't make them Arab in my opinion. Nor in the opinion of anybody who lived in those countries prior to about 1900.
That doesn't mean we don't have access to things that those people wrote, can't make factual observations about them, can't observe that things people today take for granted and treat as common sense are actually recent inventions, and use this knowledge toward noble pursuits like fighting tribalism, or less noble pursuits like starting a conversation because you are bored or noting why some answers on a trivia quiz may be more intuitive than others.
^Whatever the case, the opinions of the *Arabs* living in these countries matters more to Arab identity than what your opinion is or what the case was before 1900.
It’s natural for identities to grow in scope- for centuries, Romans could only come from the city of Rome, then they could also come from Italy, and then from the provinces too. At each point there were people like you complaining about what used to be.
The Arab League could certainly admit Sealand, Scotland, Santa's North Pole Kingdom, and South Vietnam, if it so chose, and could call all of them countries. Doing so would affect its membership rolls, but would not make any of the non-countries it admitted into countries.
amm14, with the exception of the North Pole, if the Arab league countries decided to recognize of those other entities, it would make them closer to real countries because whether something is a country depends on its recognition by other countries.
I think you're referring to the Arabian peninsula countries as the 'original' arabs, which is true. However most of the other countries have a dominant arab majority, and it's been that way for centuries. That makes them Arab both by ethnicity, language, and culture, so saying only 5-7 are Arab now isn't true (and sounds rather offensive to most Arabs :P)
It really has not been that way for centuries. These people did not start thinking of themselves as Arab until much more recently than that. They spoke dialects of Arabic, but everyone knew that they were not Arabs. They are genetically, culturally, and historically distinct from Arabs. Because of Arab conquest and subjugation of these people, they became linguistically and religiously similar, and of course there was genetic and and cultural sharing, but before the birth of pan-Arabism and Arab Nationalism, ideas that grew out of the 19th century idea of nationalism and, more specifically, a response to the nationalist movement which became known as Zionism, these people would have called themselves Copts, Syriacs, etc... but not Arab. Arab meant the nomad bedouins of the Arabian desert. They had their own proud distinct storied histories, in most cases stretching back much further than Arab history. Histories and identities that have since been suppressed by the Arab cause.
Calling a Moroccan, Algerian, Syrian, Egyptian or Somali an "Arab" makes almost as much sense as saying that English, Portuguese, French, Greek, Tunisian etc. people are all Roman. We call some of the languages spoken in these regions Latin and recognize the linguistic and cultural legacy left by the Roman Empire but we don't get this confused with the ethnicity of the people themselves because there was never any Roman Nationalism movement.
kalbahamut the African identity is also very recent. Africa used to refer to what we now call Northern Africa and it’s only very recently that the peoples living south of the Sahara have started thinking of themselves as Africans and creating multinational organizations like the “African Union”.
But I don’t think that calling a Congolese woman “African” is as bizarre as calling a Portuguese woman “Roman”. Your analogy doesn’t make sense, because you are trying to prescribe language based on its historical use instead of accepting how people like to describe themselves now - Arab and African nationalism weren’t “imposed”, they were popular movements to find solidarity against colonialism and to unite around some shared history, and even if they were imposed… so what?
This is a bit of knitpicking. Ethnical identities have been quite fluid, historically speaking, pretty much everywhere. Arab identity is constructed as much as French, Croatian, Turkish, etc.
I would have thought from how I phrased most of my comments that it would be clear I agree with Djilas, except for the use of the word nit-picking (or knitpicking). I'm doing neither. Just thinking out loud. There's nothing wrong with the quiz.
I don't know enough about this subject to jump in (although when did that ever stop me?) I only want to comment that after seeing the word knitpicking, it brings up a picture in my mind of someone carefully unraveling a mistaken stitch in knitting, a mind picture I much prefer to the one I see when the word nitpicking is used, since nits are the eggs of head lice. I think we should start a movement to use knitpicking instead. The meaning would be about the same :)
I think where most people today would use the word "Arab," a more accurate term would be "Arabic"- something related to Arab culture. But not actually Arab.
Similar to how it's more accurate to call some from Mexico Hispanic than it is to call them Spanish.
No all that matters is if today’s Mexicans call themselves “Spanish” and if today’s Algerians call themselves “Arab”. Not whatever ppl believed in the 19th century when the Ottoman and Spanish empires were still around and prevented national identities from forming
nah bro, the way we determine which countries are arab and which are not is by using a jetpunk user's extremely knowledgeable and well-versed grasp of the "boundary" that determines whether a country is arab or not.
kalbahamut why are you being such an autist about this honestly? Just accept what people tell you about their own identity. Are you “um actually”ing Arab people in real life too?
What do you mean one is not a country? Are you talking about Palestine?! It's all Israel and the united kingdom's fault! Palestine did nothing and they are being attacked!
I'm a native Arabic speaker. And all of them with the exception of a few East African countries primarily speak some dialect of Arabic. And all of them are countries :)
The case of Palestine is not a problem here. Palestine may not be a sovereign nation, but it is an existing organisation that can logically be a "member of the arab league".
Sure it can. and what this in effect means is that representatives from the PNA get to have a seat at the table of the Arab League, and the quiz is slightly more challenging since it includes one entity that unlike the others is not a sovereign state. But it's not a "problem," per se. Just a quirk of politics.
For all the Arabs and Muslims Palestine is a country and forever will be. I am a Muslim Arab and Palestine is my neighbor country since I was a kid. Israel is the one which is not a country for us. It is a plague in the middle. Soon Palestine will be declared as a country just like it has always been and soon everyone will know the reality about Israel. You have to live in the middle of the tension to get the facts.
Do your research, over half of the world's countries recognise Palestine as a country...it only isn't an "official country" because the UN doesn't recognise it
Never thought that Comoros, and island country probably between one and two-thousand miles away from the closest other country (in the Arab League), is in the Arab League. Wow.
I think they mean on nearly every other quiz palestine is greyed out/already filled in (sometimes even left out). Having it as an actual answer is not consistent with the other quizzes. It is in the caveats ofcourse, but we have been trained by now not to type in palestine.
(I did get it btw, but only because I saw something was missing between o and q)
suprisingly comoros is an arab country. i dont really remember details but omanis must have conquered islands and asimilated people and turned them muslims. you can google it cuz again i dont really remember details
palestine is not even a country. this is basic if UN doesnt recognize u, u are not a country. so simply palestine is not a country so as nagarno-karabakh, Transnistria, somaliland, south osetia etc.
"If the UN doesn't recognize you, you aren't a country"
This statement is just completely wrong. The Vatican City is recognized by most, if not all UN members. It is not recognized by the UN for the simple fact that it does not want to be a member. It is still a country.
Places like Kosovo and Taiwan are also not recognized by the UN, but they are definitely countries.
I agree with TurkeyCookTime. The UN doesn't recognize Palestine because they took almost all of their land and turned it into Israel for the Jewish after World War II.
Interesting to follow the eternal debate around who is and who is not an Arab. However, if all of these countries are part of the Arab League is because they have some sort of link to the Arab world, which includes having Arabic as an official language and part of the country's population identifying as Arab. Also, the countries must request to join the organization, which means that they have done a self-reflection process prior to requesting membership.
Palestine has mixed recognition (and even many of those that do recognize it nominally don't really treat it like a country), limited autonomy, unclear borders and fractured and uncertain political control.
If you say the US and Canada are illegitimate because they are "settler-colonial states," what framework do we use to judge that? Vietnam is almost entirely on territory colonized and settled by the Vietnamese, whose homeland in southern China was similarly colonized and settled by the Chinese. Turkey was famously settled by the Turks, who displaced and often genocided the prior Christian inhabitants. Similarly, much Palestinian ancestry itself comes from the imperial settling by Arabs from the Umayyad Caliphate on.
So this is just history - populations have changed and moved.
the state of israel on the other hand has the stated purpose of replacing palestinian people in israel with "jewish people" even tho many palestinians are jewish. on top of the fact that israel has continuously acted at the behest of the west its fair to see why people call it settler colonialism. palestinian people have lived in what is now israel for a very long time and saying that they are the result of umayyad settler colonialism is ridiculous considering that what is considered a "palestinian" genetically has lived in palestine for 1000s of years
plus implying that america and canada arent settler colonial states is weird. literally the entire history of those countries are settling once indigenous lands with the political backing of their respective governments.
It’s natural for identities to grow in scope- for centuries, Romans could only come from the city of Rome, then they could also come from Italy, and then from the provinces too. At each point there were people like you complaining about what used to be.
But I don’t think that calling a Congolese woman “African” is as bizarre as calling a Portuguese woman “Roman”. Your analogy doesn’t make sense, because you are trying to prescribe language based on its historical use instead of accepting how people like to describe themselves now - Arab and African nationalism weren’t “imposed”, they were popular movements to find solidarity against colonialism and to unite around some shared history, and even if they were imposed… so what?
Arab - when referring to the culture
Arabic - when referring to the language
Arabian - when referring things specifically from the Arabian Peninsula
Similar to how it's more accurate to call some from Mexico Hispanic than it is to call them Spanish.
http://www.jetpunk.com/user-quizzes/142762/arab-countries
also jetpunkers: taiwan numba wan!!!
Other Jetpunkers: seem to have an impossible time understanding what this means.
Enjoy your life.
Princess, I think you can't see the forest for the trees.
(I did get it btw, but only because I saw something was missing between o and q)
For those not getting the joke, it's that country that sits outside all the Jetpunk Venn diagrams.
This statement is just completely wrong. The Vatican City is recognized by most, if not all UN members. It is not recognized by the UN for the simple fact that it does not want to be a member. It is still a country.
Places like Kosovo and Taiwan are also not recognized by the UN, but they are definitely countries.