Abdullah Laroui: A Comparative Analysis

Both pieces speak of the bias of ethnocentrism from the west in accordance to the middle east. History is seen only by what is contemporary at the time according to the first piece by Abdullah Laroui. Within the second piece by Edward Said he is clarifying about his book over orientalism and the continuation of the same thinking that people see the middle east as a picture that does not move since it is not the same as those who are looking at it. Additionally both pieces remark about the issues of people looking from an outward perspective and making assumptions based on the descriptions from pieces of history and trying to place the people of a country into a box that they can understand. Abdullah Laroui specifically endeavors to look at the many discrepancies over the years that people have made when looking at the people of a nation they do not know. He speaks about how both sides, the west and the middle east take on the same bias when looking at each other. That neither take a look at the others history in full scope. Additionally, that when people look at the middle east they look at the laws, theology, and the political status and believe that all the people within the nations completely agree with everything when in fact they do not. The people living in these nations are lumped together with the …show more content…
He wants people to look not at one nation separately but to be able to spread information they gain in an educational worldly manner. He wants people to know the issues of how mass media tend to have tunnel vision of specific areas and want to distract people away from learning the differences of people on a cultural context in order to understand. Although, he also points out that those in the middle east tend to do the same as the west and that neither take time to understand the other on a society