Revolt/Revolution in Egypt

[Cecil XIX]

This seems like it deserves it's own thread.

For my part, I fear this will go the way of the Iranian and Russian Revolutions: Well-meaning protesters will depose the government and create a power vacuum that radical thugs can step into and seize power. This also comports to my theory that 2011 will mirror 1979 in terms of US foreign policy debacles.

Opinions?

[Noncommunist]

What makes you think it'll succeed now where other mass protests haven't in the past? And what about protests in Yemen, Jordan, or Albania?

[Fragony]

What makes you think it'll succeed now where other mass protests haven't in the past? And what about protests in Yemen, Jordan, or Albania?

Aren't you kinda answering your own question

http://www.twicsy.com/i/UNZex

^- 21 century welcomes ya

[Brenus]

“For my part, I fear this will go the way of the Iranian and Russian Revolutions”: There is a risk of it but can’t blame them to try to get rid of their actual thugs and corrupted masters…
Because the alternative could be something else than either the Shah and the Savak or Khomeiny and the Revolution Guards…

Perhaps it will be a real democracy…

[Fisherking]

Dose any one think that this Revolution will turn out better than all of the others that end in another dictatorship or prolonged civil war?

So far as I am aware, only the American Revolution ended with a stable representative government.

I am not saying that they were special, they got ever so lucky that the military power didn’t have designs to rule.


http://www.delawareonline.com/articl...ON11/101290306

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...f962c8a4a1b758

We know they object to a repressive authoritarian government but is it enough to keep it from happening again?

[Idaho]

This seems like it deserves it's own thread.

For my part, I fear this will go the way of the Iranian and Russian Revolutions: Well-meaning protesters will depose the government and create a power vacuum that radical thugs can step into and seize power. This also comports to my theory that 2011 will mirror 1979 in terms of US foreign policy debacles.

Opinions?

It may go that way if the US meddles with the process or starts objecting to the democratic choices of the Egyptian people.

Dose any one think that this Revolution will turn out better than all of the others that end in another dictatorship or prolonged civil war?

So far as I am aware, only the American Revolution ended with a stable representative government.

I am not saying that they were special, they got ever so lucky that the military power didn’t have designs to rule.


http://www.delawareonline.com/articl...ON11/101290306

http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/...f962c8a4a1b758

We know they object to a repressive authoritarian government but is it enough to keep it from happening again?

The American government where representative?! They were a small clique of wealthy men.

[Hax]

But the revolution is not religious in tone, unlike the earlier Iranian revolution. I think that's important to remember and while the Muslim Brotherhood has said that they're moving along with the revolution, not leading it.

[Subotan]

“For my part, I fear this will go the way of the Iranian and Russian Revolutions”: There is a risk of it but can’t blame them to try to get rid of their actual thugs and corrupted masters…
Because the alternative could be something else than either the Shah and the Savak or Khomeiny and the Revolution Guards…

Perhaps it will be a real democracy…

Fear of a misstep is the single most effective weapon authoritarians have against democrats and callers for change.

[Furunculus]

There is a risk of it but can’t blame them to try to get rid of their actual thugs and corrupted masters…
Because the alternative could be something else than either the Shah and the Savak or Khomeiny and the Revolution Guards…

Perhaps it will be a real democracy…

very much agreed, go the egyptian 'street'!

[Hax]

So if 30 percent of the voters decide that The Muslim Brotherhood is the best party, it's not a real democracy?

[Furunculus]

So if 30 percent of the voters decide that The Muslim Brotherhood is the best party, it's not a real democracy?

i'm not sure what you're asking?

[Hax]

Well, it wasn't directed at you, but at Brenus. I'm just wondering why everyone is getting incredibly nervous about a potential (moderate) Islamist-leaning government.

[Furunculus]

well it depends on the definition of moderate.

while the MB have said some 'pleasingly' moderate things it has also been utterly cretinous by blaming the church bombing on israel; "because only the zionists have an interest in a divided egypt"!

if a british politician said something that idiotic he would be reviled, and i would expect everyone else in the country to hold the same opinion, so his chances of office would be zero.

question - do i hold a double standard and expect better from british politicians than i do from other politicians?

if yes - is that racist or realist?
if no - do i condemn them utterly even tho there might be no better alternative?

[Husar]

So if 30 percent of the voters decide that The Muslim Brotherhood is the best party, it's not a real democracy?

Not if the muslim brotherhood becomes the sole ruling party then.

[rory_20_uk]

It may go that way if the US meddles with the process or starts objecting to the democratic choices of the Egyptian people.

The American government where representative?! They were a small clique of wealthy men.

...And the victors write the history which unsurprisingly puts them in a positive light. What a coincidence.

The Americans (amongst many others) would much rather a Totalitarian Police State that they can do business with than something that the people might want, as the people are far more difficult to bribe to do what the Americans want - religion might get in the way. As Tom Hehrer's song "send the Marines" spells out so eloquently.

Small cliques have a history of hijacking upswells of indignation - the Bolsheviks were not what why the Revolution started, but they capitalised on it nevertheless.

Whoever gets in will be faced with a country with still low levels of education, inflation, poor job prospects. Removing the head doesn't solve structural problems. If you can't fix it, you can blame others as a scape goat - which is what extremists do best. Moderates rarely if ever capitalise when a society is in turmoil as extremists always have a nice, simple, clear plan.

Iran would also view trying to get some extremists in power a great investment to further distract from themselves - nutters in charge of the Suez canal is not something to be tolerated.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

So if 30 percent of the voters decide that The Muslim Brotherhood is the best party, it's not a real democracy?

Someone once said that the Islamist definition of democracy is "One man, one vote, one time" unless of course people voted the "wrong" way the first time.

[gaelic cowboy]

Someone once said that the Islamist definition of democracy is "One man, one vote, one time" unless of course people voted the "wrong" way the first time.

Replace Islamist with Irish and it sounds like Barroso on the Lisbon treaty

[Hax]

Not if the muslim brotherhood becomes the sole ruling party then.

Yeah, but I don't think that's likely to happen, especially in a country so diverse as Egypt.

[gaelic cowboy]

Yeah, but I don't think that's likely to happen, especially in a country so diverse as Egypt.

I agree with Hax Eygpt is practically 90% Sunnai according to wkik(I know I know) but that 90% is divided between about 3 large ethnic groups plus what around 9-10% Christian.

[Husar]

Yeah, but I don't think that's likely to happen, especially in a country so diverse as Egypt.

I never said it was, I just answered your question. Calm down please.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm totally psyched. I think Egypt is making it happen. Mubarak showed a fatal weakness in sacking his cabinet. Move in for the kill.

Finally all of the rhetoric about the internet and the spread of information is paying off. Our government should stand back and watch and keep the aid going to Egypt just as long as the events don't put islamists in charge (which seems unlikely at this point).

Hopefully, Israel is starting to realize that their abusive game is ending. I hope the new Egyptian govenment ends the blockade on Gaza and opens the border. I'm going to miss the comical statements like; "if this happens the mid-east peace process will be in jeopardy". Horsecrap of the highest order, now it will be able to begin.

[Hosakawa Tito]

Egypt's military will determine the outcome. I just don't want to see them exchange one dictatorship for an "Iranian like democracy" of extremists. Our allies are the ordinary Egyptian people. They want jobs, basic human freedoms many of us take for granted, a better more stable future for their families. Are there any opposition groups like that to step into the power vacuum and rule with a moderate hand and accept other opposition groups themselves? We can only hope...but I'm not exactly optimistic.

[ICantSpellDawg]

Be optimistic. This is good news. Low death tolls, modernity inspired protests, relatively benign response by Mubarak (honestly, our own govenment would and has cracked down harder). Infrequent mentions of "Islam" per se other than general "God is great" chants. During our own revolution, iterations on Gods greatness was a major rallying point for us as well.

I havn't seen the election of Hamas in Palestine to be a terrible evolution. I wan't the people to choose their govenment with some constitutional guarantees to prevent abuses like those that occur in Iran, Russia and China. If the movers can find a way to enshrine speach and assembly rights for both men and women into a constitution, we will have a winner.

Give Egyptians our support of their non-violent change and they will feel like part of the modern community. Don't withdraw aid or threaten to. I beleive that the military has some power here, but I beleive that their hands are tied at this point. Maybe they can make themselves useful and encourage Mubarak to leave for Saudi Arabia.

[Lemur]

To everyone who's wringing their hands over whether or not a change in power will result in a Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government, I say get bent. The Economist did a good job of summing up my thinking:

Obviously, we should all be warily celebrating the possible fall of the Mubarak regime, not bemoaning it. Not because it will lead to any near-term benefits for us, but because it stands a chance of making Egyptians freer. [...]

That doesn't mean that such freedom will be in the interests of the United States, in the near term or really in any term we can envision. We should be cheered when other nations start to "find their voice", not because it is in our interests, but despite the fact that it may not be.

[Fisherking]

The American government where representative?! They were a small clique of wealthy men.

LOL Those you sight as a clique of wealthy men were at least chosen by the assemblies of their respective colonies to represent them.

It was an English possession after all, so naturally those in charge tended to be the wealthy.

It did however, turn out a bit better for all concerned then those which followed, for example; The French Revolution or The Russian Revolution.

Simply exposing the ideals of liberty often don’t translate into more freedom for the common man.


edit: I am not particularly interested in who’s interests new governments are formed where ever in the world.

I do hope that some may result in something other than thinly veiled dictatorships and that people enjoy some degree of freedom and liberty.

We can cheer them on but history usually points to it being more of the same.

[ICantSpellDawg]

To everyone who's wringing their hands over whether or not a change in power will result in a Muslim Brotherhood-dominated government, I say get bent. The Economist did a good job of summing up my thinking:

Obviously, we should all be warily celebrating the possible fall of the Mubarak regime, not bemoaning it. Not because it will lead to any near-term benefits for us, but because it stands a chance of making Egyptians freer. [...]

That doesn't mean that such freedom will be in the interests of the United States, in the near term or really in any term we can envision. We should be cheered when other nations start to "find their voice", not because it is in our interests, but despite the fact that it may not be.

My sentiments exactly.

Our support of these types of regimes is in our benefit in the short term but against our interests in the long term. I have always said; work with them when there is no alternative and be their best friend, but the second a dictator turns his back and there is an opportunity - stick a knife in his back. Dictators are the enemy irrespective of what ideology they pretend to serve. Their ideology is themselves. Our ideology is and always will be the freedom of people. When an oppressed people rise up, they save us trillions in what would otherwise be some varying grade of conflict like an Iraq or an Afghanistan. Our foreign policy goal is the freedom of people, not the aggrandizement of the United States.

[Hax]

I don't understand why everyone is comparing the situation to Iran. The Twelver Shi'ite concept of the Islamic state is completely different from the Sunni concept of the Islamic state. Not to mention the fact that the very concept of an Islamic state was something unheard of in the Shi'ite world since the fall of the Fatimid dynasty.

[ICantSpellDawg]

LOL Those you sight as a clique of wealthy men were at least chosen by the assemblies of their respective colonies to represent them.

Except for women, children, and slaves... No system is perfect. As long as they go for loftier ideals than a Medieval styled theocracy it is a long term win for everyone.

[Fisherking]

Except for women, children, and slaves... No system is perfect. As long as they go for loftier ideals than a Medieval styled theocracy it is a long term win for everyone.

And at that time in history can you cite a government ( other than the Native American tribes) who did represent those interests?

[ICantSpellDawg]

No, my point is that movements are relative based on their location in time and place. The basic and transcendental ideals, however, are more or less the same. There were people who pushed for equal rights for women and slaves in both the American and French revolutions, but it wasn't implemented for many, many years.