The nub of Richard J. Antoun's interesting article (IJMES 32:441–63) is that the scholarly attention given to formal associations and institutions in the Middle East has overshadowed those implicit or vernacular processes of cooperation and reconciliation that actually constitute the core of “civil society,” and that are adapting to such changes as transnational migration and telecommunications. This warning against ethnocentrism from such a distinguished ethnographer of Jordan is timely and valuable. However, some dimensions are missing from Antoun's analysis, and maybe his case is overstated.