Revolt/Revolution in Egypt

[Fragony]

Probably will get your way with Algeria, heard there is some serious unrest there as well. Only Marocco seems to be calm. A shame all eyes are on Egypt, understandable but this is much bigger

[Fisherking]

Probably will get your way with Algeria, heard there is some serious unrest there as well. Only Marocco seems to be calm. A shame all eyes are on Egypt, understandable but this is much bigger

Some links in no particular order:

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...347446530.html

http://parkerspitzer.blogs.cnn.com/2...nrest-spreads/

http://www.politico.com/blogs/laurar...e.html?showall

http://www.staradvertiser.com/column...n_mideast.html

[Furunculus]

america still capable of winning the war of ideas:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...rica_and_arabs

[al Roumi]

america still capable of winning the war of ideas:

http://www.economist.com/blogs/lexin...rica_and_arabs

I think you mean, America is well placed to win the war of ideas. Its approach is all wrong. Its reactions to the emerging revolution were confused, its influence (in Egypt) is largely rejected.

I agree that as a beacon of liberty, freedom of expression and democracy, America is as well placed as ever. However, its foreign policy of readily obscuring the lantern of demcoracy/freedom to keep the world amenable to its own interests is counter-productive.

If America really wants to put its money where its mouth is, i.e. that everyone is equal and deserves democracy and rights, then it will have to change its foreign policy and overcome a good deal of ill-will that it's caused itself.

[Furunculus]

I think you mean, America is well placed to win the war of ideas. Its approach is all wrong. Its reactions to the emerging revolution were confused, its influence (in Egypt) is largely rejected.

I agree that as a beacon of liberty, freedom of expression and democracy, America is as well placed as ever. However, its foreign policy of readily obscuring the lantern of demcoracy/freedom to keep the world amenable to its own interests is counter-productive.

If America really wants to put its money where its mouth is, i.e. that everyone is equal and deserves democracy and rights, then it will have to change its foreign policy and overcome a good deal of ill-will that it's caused itself.

i'm not disagreed on that point.

[Hax]

Just saw a bit of Hillary Clinton's interview with someone on Al-Jazeera about the ongoing protests. The hypocrisy, incredible. Talking about how "her heart is with the Iranian people" and "they are standing up against the dictators" and that kind of stuff. Would've been more impressed if she would say the same thing about Ben Ali or Mubarak. Go ahead, say the same thing about Bouteflika, mrs Clinton.

[ICantSpellDawg]

I'm a bit concerned about the Muslim brotherhood at this point. Who will win the philosophical battle within the ranks? On the one hand, you've got a moderate wing of young and sensible people who recognize an individuals right to practice their religion, even conservatice Islam, within a secular state. On the other hand you have radical xenophobes who are looking who are looking for both a nuclear holocaust of Israel and an Islamic state. My limited opinion of what should occur is based on optimism combined with basic principles; remain together in the face of brutal opposition, fragment when times get better.

Hopefully, when the brotherhood is not faced with regime persecution, they can fragment into two main parties.

In the one camp could be a party much like the Christian Democrats in Germany or the Justice and Development party in Turkey. Parties who believe that Religion should play a central role in the daily life of the practitioner, while recognizing the destructive capabilities that a theocracy would pose.

The other could consist of a far right party that, losing a third of its support and consisting of only the curmudgeon elderly and illogical and deranged youth would be stuck in a downward spiral.

In summary, a healthy development rests on the assumption that any new nation enshrines basic freedoms into the constitution - this will be the real test. Speech and assembly are important, due process as well. Particularly in the case of religious states, seperation of church and state laws and freedom of religion are the lynchpins in the freddom fabric. Without them, you get Iran, no ifs, ands, or buts.

[Hax]

There's moderate Islamism and then there's extreme Islamism. They are both present in the ranks of the Muslim Brotherhood, but the second group is nothing more than a fringe. Popular support for a declaration of war on Israel or the imposure of an Islamic state is hardly present.

The thing is that if parliamentary elections are held, the extremists will have to talk to the moderates (I'm still talking about Islamists here). I don't think it's a very good idea if the Islamists are alienated from parliament as that will probably only prove to be a gateway for truly radical ideas to creep in.

[al Roumi]

i'm not disagreed on that point.

And I was railing against the economist falling for the duplicity of "umurica is a beacon of freedom & democracy", as if it achieves this in a vaccuum...