The Reception of American Culture in the Middle East after “The Arab Spring”
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Despite its being old, the relationship between the Middle East and the West(America included)has been marked by confrontation, intervention, and stereotyping. The West, driven by its interests and blinded by bias and hostility, has been keen on colonizing the Middle East, empowering Israel,and foolishly disregarding the aspirations of Arabs and Muslims, which tremendously contributes to generating anti-American sentiments and bitterness. These feelings,fed further by the pro-Israeli tilt American policy,do hinder the advancement of the US national interests which have been subordinated to those of Israel that has been receiving direct and unconditional support from the West. Such a type of support for Israel that occupies Palestine demonstrates folly, disregard of laws, and blindness to reality. This blindness itself underlies America’s reluctance to adopt a proactive role in the “Arab Spring”, the political movements sweeping the Middle East for the first time in decades. This reluctance has impacted the image of the US that has, unfortunately, been negative due to America’s taking sides with Israel at the expense of Arabs’ natural needs and inalienable rights in Palestine. This American stance has been responsible for the Israelis’ perpetrating atrocities, turning a deaf ear to the Security Council resolutions, and usurping Palestine in defiance of all international laws. By supporting Israel that acts this way, the US has sacrificed its interests, has lost its credibility, has isolated itself, and has failed to be a leading power. To regain its status, the US should reexamine its policy,stop its unconditional support for Israel,and align itself with peoples’ aspirations. Key words: Stereotyping; Double standards; Anti-American sentiments; Unconditional support; Regain Resume En depit de son etre vieux, la relation entre le Moyen-Orient et l'Occident (Amerique est incluee) a ete marquee par la confrontation, l'intervention, et les stereotypes. L'Occident, conduit par ses interets et aveugles par les prejuges et l'hostilite, a ete vif sur la colonisation du Moyen-Orient, l'autonomisation Israel, et sottement sans tenir compte des aspirations des Arabes et des musulmans, ce qui contribue enormement a generer sentiments anti-americains et d'amertume. Ces sentiments, alimente encore par la politique d'inclinaison pro-israelien americain, ne entravent l'avancement des interets nationaux americains qui ont ete subordonnes a ceux d'Israel qui a recu un soutien direct et inconditionnel de l'Occident. Un tel type de soutien a Israel qui occupe la Palestine demontre la folie, le mepris des lois, et la cecite a la realite. Cet aveuglement se sous-tend reticence des Americains a adopter un role proactif dans le «printemps arabe», les mouvements politiques balayant le Moyen-Orient pour la premiere fois depuis des decennies. Cette reticence a influence l'image de l'americain qui a malheureusement ete negative en raison de prendre parti de l'Amerique avec Israel aux depens des Arabes besoins naturels et les droits inalienables en Palestine. Cette position americaine a ete responsable pour les Israeliens atrocites perpetrer, faisant la sourde oreille aux resolutions du Conseil de securite, et d'usurper la Palestine au mepris de toutes les lois internationales. En soutenant Israel, qui agit de cette facon, les Etats-Unis a sacrifie ses interets, a perdu sa credibilite, s'est isole et n'a pas reussi a etre une puissance de premier plan. Pour retrouver son statut, les Etats-Unis devraient reexaminer sa politique, cesser son soutien inconditionnel a Israel, et de s'aligner avec les aspirations des peuples. Mots cles: Stereotypes; Doubles standards; Sentiments anti-americains; Soutien Inconditionnel; Retrouver
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.014 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.009 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".