Social changes around the world are having a disproportionate impact on Arab societies. Loyalty and obligation have played a particularly strong role in how Arabs relate to each other and to their rulers, and a rising individualism in the region poses challenges for family patriarchs, tribal elders, and government leaders.
NETWORKS OF TRUST are a universal phenomenon. They have been particularly influential in the Arab world in part because of cultural and religious affinity but also for practical reasons: sustained security challenges, limited government capacity, and limited mobility. Arabs have committed time and money—and sometimes blood— to sustain ties with family and tribe.
Arabs increasingly report that these networks no longer serve their interests and are too time consuming. They live farther from extended families and work longer hours, and they seek to devote more time to friends and immediate family. Communications and social media have also given them alternative sources of information and alternative entertainment options. Technology also gives people privacy, and individuals seek it much more than in the past. As Arabs feel more economically strapped, and as a sense of individualism grows, families and tribes become less consequential. Some people are more willing to put their faith in government; more simply feel a need to become more self-reliant.
This study concludes that it is a mistake to assume that loyalty plays the same central role in Arabs’ lives that it did a generation ago. There are places and circumstances in which it does, but loyalty is a variable and not a constant. We conclude that individualism is on the rise in the region, affecting the way people relate to power and to each other. We also conclude that individuals constantly make cost-benefit calculations about adhering to expected norms of behavior. Most still want an extended network to rely on in extreme circumstances, but they are more likely to rely on friends and colleagues day to day. We find that people are much more likely to rely on tribe and family in circumstances where security, government capacity, and mobility is low. Urban elites in safe areas have a different set of attitudes than the poor and vulnerable. Finally, we find that young people are showing a much wider range of attitudes toward loyalty and obligation than their elders, partly because of technology and partly because of economics.