Old order stifles the birth of a new Egypt

by charvaka Tue Nov 22, 2011 10:50 pm

http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/world/middleeast/vestiges-of-hosni-mubaraks-order-stifle-birth-of-new-egypt.html

If the demonstrations that culminated in February were an uprising against President Hosni Mubarak, the revolt today is against his legacy.

This may foreshadow a dangerous and prolonged period of unrest in Egypt, as the spectacular show of discontent on Tuesday in Tahrir Square demonstrates that there is no existing institution to channel their frustrations. The military appears largely oblivious to the scale of the protests, and Islamist parties are single-mindedly pursuing their political goals as they predict a healthy showing in the coming elections. No leader, of any ideological bent, has emerged to channel the discontent once again spilling into the streets.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:39 am

Oh come, these are just the birth pangs. It's now only a matter of time before the junta negotiates its position in the new order, identifies a sufficiently pliable (or like-minded) bunch of pols and puts the country through some sham elections and voila, you'll have your new Egypt (resemblances to Pakistan being the figments of imagination of cynical status-quoists).

And then, the US, NATO and assorted non-cynical crusaders for change can pat themselves on the back on how they nobly ushered in democracy in Egypt, granting its huddled masses the greatest gift of the Western civilization. And yes, light up another candle as a tribute to the efficacy of people power.

by charvaka Wed Nov 23, 2011 2:26 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:the junta negotiates its position in the new order, identifies a sufficiently pliable (or like-minded) bunch of pols and puts the country through some sham elections

That is exactly what the people in Tahrir are demonstrating against. This time last year, the current situation would have been dismissed by cynics like you as impossible, so there.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Nov 23, 2011 8:51 am

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:the junta negotiates its position in the new order, identifies a sufficiently pliable (or like-minded) bunch of pols and puts the country through some sham elections
That is exactly what the people in Tahrir are demonstrating against. This time last year, the current situation would have been dismissed by cynics like you as impossible, so there.

Yeah, but this was the precise situation that the dewy-eyed cheerleaders for people power refused to acknowledge in the heady euphoria of Feb '11. And now, these renewed protests notwithstanding, the most likely outcome will be a new Egypt that is the same old same old.

by Hellsangel Wed Nov 23, 2011 1:50 pm

Democracy does not work in some places.

by charvaka Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:01 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Democracy does not work in some places.

Until it does.

by charvaka Wed Nov 23, 2011 3:03 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:the junta negotiates its position in the new order, identifies a sufficiently pliable (or like-minded) bunch of pols and puts the country through some sham elections
That is exactly what the people in Tahrir are demonstrating against. This time last year, the current situation would have been dismissed by cynics like you as impossible, so there.
Yeah, but this was the precise situation that the dewy-eyed cheerleaders for people power refused to acknowledge in the heady euphoria of Feb '11. And now, these renewed protests notwithstanding, the most likely outcome will be a new Egypt that is the same old same old.

Most people I read at that time acknowledged that the future is not going to be clean, easy or smooth. But what's clear is that people power has already replaced a corrupt old order with something a little more accountable.

by Kris Wed Nov 23, 2011 10:19 pm

charvaka wrote:http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/23/world/middleeast/vestiges-of-hosni-mubaraks-order-stifle-birth-of-new-egypt.html

This may foreshadow a dangerous and prolonged period of unrest in Egypt, as the spectacular show of discontent on Tuesday in Tahrir Square demonstrates that there is no existing institution to channel their frustrations. The military appears largely oblivious to the scale of the protests, and Islamist parties are single-mindedly pursuing their political goals as they predict a healthy showing in the coming elections. No leader, of any ideological bent, has emerged to channel the discontent once again spilling into the streets.

>>>> The likely inevitable prolonged period of unrest is the Achilles' heel of these societies. Absent a developed political platform or two, what will rush in is the Islamists or the Army and it is back to the old ways. I know this is a catch- 22, but the only remote possibility here seems to be a well-meaning strongman/army that engenders an evolution toward a democracy over time. In other words,a modern day Cincinnatus (?) withdrawing to the barracks when his job is done.

by charvaka Wed Nov 23, 2011 11:50 pm

Kris wrote:The likely inevitable prolonged period of unrest is the Achilles' heel of these societies. Absent a developed political platform or two, what will rush in is the Islamists or the Army and it is back to the old ways. I know this is a catch- 22, but the only remote possibility here seems to be a well-meaning strongman/army that engenders an evolution toward a democracy over time. In other words,a modern day Cincinnatus (?) withdrawing to the barracks when his job is done.

The Turkey model is getting talked about quite a lot in the Middle East, including in Egypt. For the next several years, the army will inevitably play a role in politics, like it did in Turkey for 80 years. My hope is that Egypt's transition to institutional democracy can be faster than that, but it's just a hope. The key is that whatever regime they do have is more accountable, and that radical Islamism is kept at bay.

by Kris Thu Nov 24, 2011 1:55 am

charvaka wrote:
Kris wrote:The likely inevitable prolonged period of unrest is the Achilles' heel of these societies. Absent a developed political platform or two, what will rush in is the Islamists or the Army and it is back to the old ways. I know this is a catch- 22, but the only remote possibility here seems to be a well-meaning strongman/army that engenders an evolution toward a democracy over time. In other words,a modern day Cincinnatus (?) withdrawing to the barracks when his job is done.
The Turkey model is getting talked about quite a lot in the Middle East, including in Egypt. For the next several years, the army will inevitably play a role in politics, like it did in Turkey for 80 years. My hope is that Egypt's transition to institutional democracy can be faster than that, but it's just a hope. The key is that whatever regime they do have is more accountable, and that radical Islamism is kept at bay.

>>>>Turkey had certain advantages, if you want to call it that, in some ways. When Ataturk set the wheels in motion, the world was a much younger place i.e. no 24/7 media, internet coverage that gave people awareness of possibilities. With instant knowledge comes urgency, but without the cultural, structural wherewithal and hence, my allusion to a remote possibility in my previous post. Yeah, the Turkish model has been touted by the likes of Musharaff and even Zia Ul Haq (!) I think. Frankly, Egypt has a somewhat better chance than Pakistan at this, given the presence of an intellectual life there historically that allows self-analysis.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Nov 24, 2011 3:23 am

charvaka wrote:The Turkey model is getting talked about quite a lot in the Middle East, including in Egypt. For the next several years, the army will inevitably play a role in politics, like it did in Turkey for 80 years. My hope is that Egypt's transition to institutional democracy can be faster than that, but it's just a hope. The key is that whatever regime they do have is more accountable, and that radical Islamism is kept at bay.

Haha..now that the euphoria has subsided and it turns out that the Tahrir square revolution merely replaced "the old corrupt order" with a new military junta while completely trashing an already moribund economy, your best hope for the future is the emergence of an enlightened Ataturk-like autocrat who (a) will get rid of those pesky Islamists (even though their ideology might have a greater popular following) but (b) will somehow be more accountable to the people of Egypt and (c) best of all, will voluntarily give up his absolute powers to a democratic set-up in a country which has never known democracy?? Wow. And it is this remote possibility that drives your unflagging cheerleading for this and other regime changes in the region? Double wow.

by truthbetold Thu Nov 24, 2011 4:29 pm

Let us seewhat critics of arab spring are saying?

The people of Egypt should not have protested the distatorship of Hosni Mubarak and draconian secret police because the people could not ID a perfect revolution, perfect leader, perfect plan and perfect time table.

Any one who read history understands change of regimes in a backward nation like egypt could be messy, and can go backwards easily. After legitimate people's movement against Shah of Iran, People of Iran are suffering for the last 30 years under a draconian theocratic rule.

Fear of failure of people's movements do not deter masses from revolting against their poverty, and oppression. History is full of movements that failed in the short term but achived democracy and better life after multiple tries. Egypt is relatively well organized and stands a good chance of moving towards democracy faster than countries like Libya.

In the meanwhile, sideline sitting, merlot sipping, anna hazare biting cynics can heckle all they want.

by charvaka Thu Nov 24, 2011 9:10 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Haha..now that the euphoria has subsided and it turns out that the Tahrir square revolution merely replaced "the old corrupt order"

Well, that mere replacement was unimaginable a year ago and would have provoked multiple hahas and wows a year ago from cynics who habitually underestimate the potential for change. I'd rather believe in the possibility of positive change, than convince myself that nothing can ever be better than the ousted dictator's rule.

Making the perfect the enemy of the good is a tired, worn-out strategy adopted by all status-quoists. The people of Egypt are not doing that, and that makes me happy.

by truthbetold Thu Nov 24, 2011 10:56 pm

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Haha..now that the euphoria has subsided and it turns out that the Tahrir square revolution merely replaced "the old corrupt order"
Well, that mere replacement was unimaginable a year ago and would have provoked multiple hahas and wows a year ago from cynics who habitually underestimate the potential for change. I'd rather believe in the possibility of positive change, than convince myself that nothing can ever be better than the ousted dictator's rule.

Making the perfect the enemy of the good is a tired, worn-out strategy adopted by all status-quoists. The people of Egypt are not doing that, and that makes me happy.

Despite the odds, obstacles and strong possibilities of continued loss of life, Syrian people are rising again and again. Syrian political dynamics are the opposite that of Bahrain where Sunni minority rulers crushed majority shia revolt (accused of being instigated by Iran) with support from Saudis. Syria's shia rulers(supported by Iran) are trying to crush majority sunnis(who have saudi support).

by Merlot Daruwala Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:15 am

charvaka wrote:Making the perfect the enemy of the good is a tired, worn-out strategy adopted by all status-quoists.

Nobody ever said Mubarak's regime was perfect, so applying a Voltairism to status-quoism is totally out of place, leave alone making it a "tired, worn-out strategy". And then, there is your presumption that this change is good. Seems more like a blind belief in change for change's sake. As you conceded earlier, your best bet now is the statistically remote possibility of an enlightened dictatorship. (Even Ataturk, much as I admire him, would be considered an inconsiderate despot by today's standards. He ruthlessly crushed all external opposition, purged his party of internal dissent and ruled with an iron hand, to the extent of controlling what the Turks spoke, wrote, believed and even what they wore.)

For now, the immediate outcome of the ouster was another military dictatorship. In the absence of any clear leaders with a mass following, the most likely outcome of any elections - if and when they are held - will be a sham democracy that slides towards a full blown dictatorship / theocracy. Either way, the fires will continue to burn at Tahrir square for a long time, while their economy goes down the tubes, inflation rages, unemployment soars, law and order breaks down and young people waste away the prime of their lives burning tyres and throwing rocks. So you got your change all right, but how are the people any better off? Please don't make the mistake of conflating what makes you feel good with what is good for the Egyptians.

charvaka wrote:The people of Egypt are not doing that, and that makes me happy.

Good for you. I don't mean to grudge you the happiness you undoubtedly deserve, but frankly, I find the whole American-style fetishizing of individual rights and egging on protesters to topple regimes in parts of the world where those rights don't quite mean the same, with no regard to the outcomes and no concern for the consequences borne by the local people, extremely irresponsible.

After all, you personally don't risk any downscaling of your lifestyle, leave alone bodily harm or death in cheering on a regime change and contributing to the collective mythology of "change". The price is paid in full by gullible youngsters in those countries who buy into this mythology and start believing that a regime change will miraculously give them an American-style democracy and their inalienable rights that the American constitution says were endowed to them by their creator. They risk losing their futures, if not their life and limb as well.

by Merlot Daruwala Fri Nov 25, 2011 7:33 am

truthbetold wrote:In the meanwhile, sideline sitting, merlot sipping, anna hazare biting cynics can heckle all they want.

Good show, TBT. Your long absence from the forum has actually resulted in an improvement in your writing style. I particularly liked this line. Content-wise, I liked your point about Iran - that should give pause to cheerleaders of regime changes - but what I liked best was there was no 500-word essay or gratuitous name-calling. Excellent progress.

by truthbetold Fri Nov 25, 2011 1:13 pm

Merlot ,

what are you now? a school teacher?

Calling other names and raising trivial irrelevant diversionary issues is your trademark.

The question regarding arab spring is simply should people wait for perfect opportunity (so it does not inconvince you) or should they rise unison to demand change. People do not give up their meagre daily earnings or risk danger to life unless they are at the end of the rope.

Your sermons of inaction in the face of severe physical and mental deprivation is pathetic. Events of the past few months showed even in the most oppressive dictatorship, the desire for better life will win over shut up and survive mentality.

by charvaka Fri Nov 25, 2011 2:58 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Nobody ever said Mubarak's regime was perfect, so applying a Voltairism to status-quoism is totally out of place, leave alone making it a "tired, worn-out strategy".

Nice job refuting something I wasn't saying. I didn't say you were claiming that the Mubarak regime was perfect. Your strategy is to create a strawman of the perfect change, with a magically-assembled set of institutions, leaders and processes all falling in place at the right time to take over from a ruthless dictatorship that has been in place for 60 years. Then you suggest that because that "perfect" strawman doesn't exist, the change that is occurring is bad. This is how you use the tired and worn-out strategy of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Please don't make the mistake of conflating what makes you feel good with what is good for the Egyptians.

Let us get a reality check. I am not the one who is upset with the actions that the Egyptian people are taking. I am encouraged by and hopeful about actions that the Egyptians are themselves taking. You are the one who thinks he knows what's good for Egyptians better than the Egyptians know for themselves. You sit wherever you sit, and assume that you know best what the Egyptians should put up with, and what they should protest against.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:I find the whole American-style fetishizing of individual rights and egging on protesters to topple regimes in parts of the world where those rights don't quite mean the same, with no regard to the outcomes and no concern for the consequences borne by the local people, extremely irresponsible.

The protests in Egypt are not occurring because I am egging them on in this widely-read forum. They are happening because the people of Egypt want change. You, for reasons best known to yourself, have decided that the Egpytians are little kids who don't know what is good for themselves.

by Merlot Daruwala Sat Nov 26, 2011 6:21 am

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Nobody ever said Mubarak's regime was perfect, so applying a Voltairism to status-quoism is totally out of place, leave alone making it a "tired, worn-out strategy".
Nice job refuting something I wasn't saying. I didn't say you were claiming that the Mubarak regime was perfect. Your strategy is to create a strawman of the perfect change, with a magically-assembled set of institutions, leaders and processes all falling in place at the right time to take over from a ruthless dictatorship that has been in place for 60 years. Then you suggest that because that "perfect" strawman doesn't exist, the change that is occurring is bad. This is how you use the tired and worn-out strategy of making the perfect the enemy of the good.

Tsk. Tsk. Stop seeing strawmen where none exist. Instead, look up the definition of status-quoism. It means seeking no change. It does not mean seeking a perfect change. Applied to Egypt, status-quo would imply continuance of Mubarak's regime. So when you accuse me of making perfection the enemy of your "good", then you imply Mubarak was perfect.

charvaka wrote:You are the one who thinks he knows what's good for Egyptians better than the Egyptians know for themselves.

Not at all. I don't claim to have any answers, I don't believe in silver bullets, nor do I believe in the portability of values across cultures, so I'm neutral to the developments. Remember, I wasn't the one to wax lyrical about what bliss it was that dawn to be alive when Mubarak stepped down. Desperate people react in desperate ways. I wish the Egyptians all the very best but realistically speaking, their situation suggests no good outcomes. That is why I find it astonishing that otherwise rational people can continue to blindly cheerlead the protests, completely indifferent to the resultant loss of lives and property and destruction of the Egyptian economy, purely on the basis of an ideology. For an atheist, this surely qualifies as religious fervor.

by truthbetold Sat Nov 26, 2011 4:14 pm

"I wish the Egyptians all the very best but realistically speaking, their situation suggests no good outcomes. That is why I find it astonishing that otherwise rational people can continue to blindly cheerlead the protests, completely indifferent to the resultant loss of lives and property and destruction of the Egyptian economy, purely on the basis of an ideology. "

Strange logic. Egyptian masses took to protest largely on their own. Severe repression did not allow a functional organization to shape before revolution. After revolution, people are sorting out between old regimes sympathisers, self promoters and relatively honest change agents. Such an analysis is not easy even in the best of democracies in normal times. It is no wonder egyptians have to make choices and live through some experimentation. This movement is relatively free of external influences and colonial direction.

The west which was cuddling mubarak was caught flat footed. In addition isreal's need for mubarak regime held the west further back. It was after a long pause after the movement started that even so called balanced requests/advice for restraint and compromise came from west. They did not have influence in initiating the movement nor the ability to control the movement. West joined the bandwagon after the fact.

Merlot's criticism is totally contrary to facts and completely misplaced. Outside people cheered and supported egyptian people as any democratic loving person would when a nation is liberated. Only Egyptians decided what to do next.

by charvaka Sun Nov 27, 2011 4:12 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:It means seeking no change. It does not mean seeking a perfect change.

Yet all your objections to the change that is happening are positioned against a mythical, perfect change.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Applied to Egypt, status-quo would imply continuance of Mubarak's regime.

As you put is so eloquently yourself, status quo would also imply this: "the most likely outcome will be a new Egypt that is the same old same old."

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Not at all. I don't claim to have any answers...

For someone who has no answers or any judgment at all about the nature of the ongoing change (which what "neutral to the developments" means), you do have a lot to say on the topic!

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Remember, I wasn't the one to wax lyrical about what bliss it was that dawn to be alive when Mubarak stepped down.

I was quoting Wordsworth about... wait for it... the French Revolution. Yes, the one that was followed by a Reign of Terror and then by an Emperor who replaced the ancien regime with his own despotic rule.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:I wish the Egyptians all the very best but realistically speaking, their situation suggests no good outcomes.

So what you would you rather have those desperate people do? Put up with the dictatorship? When they do rise up against the oppression, I see it as a welcome development. It is all fine and dandy for you to go tsk tsk about what the Egpytians are doing, much as their own oppressors in collusion with western powers have done for generations. But the fact is, the Egyptians have taken to the streets because in their judgment they have had enough.

by Merlot Daruwala Sun Nov 27, 2011 7:14 am

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:It means seeking no change. It does not mean seeking a perfect change.
Yet all your objections to the change that is happening are positioned against a mythical, perfect change.

Wrong. My objections is to the dogmatic cheerleading of the change, as if the deposition of a despot is an end in itself worthy of much hurrahs and back-patting, even if the replacement regime turns out much worse, and many people lose their lives in the process.

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Applied to Egypt, status-quo would imply continuance of Mubarak's regime.
As you put is so eloquently yourself, status quo would also imply this: "the most likely outcome will be a new Egypt that is the same old same old."

Nice try but I didn't say "the same old same old" will be perfect either. So your attempt to force-fit that nice-sounding Voltairism here remains invalid.

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Not at all. I don't claim to have any answers...
For someone who has no answers or any judgment at all about the nature of the ongoing change (which what "neutral to the developments" means), you do have a lot to say on the topic!

The topic of my writing has not been the change per se but the dogmatic certainty with which change-cheerleaders think it is good for Egypt. And yes, such smugness does evoke an intense desire in me to puncture those balloons.

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Remember, I wasn't the one to wax lyrical about what bliss it was that dawn to be alive when Mubarak stepped down.
I was quoting Wordsworth about... wait for it... the French Revolution. Yes, the one that was followed by a Reign of Terror and then by an Emperor who replaced the ancien regime with his own despotic rule.

So I guess that makes you the modern day Wordsworth as far as the Tahrir square revolutionaries are concerned.

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:I wish the Egyptians all the very best but realistically speaking, their situation suggests no good outcomes.
So what you would you rather have those desperate people do? Put up with the dictatorship? When they do rise up against the oppression, I see it as a welcome development. It is all fine and dandy for you to go tsk tsk about what the Egpytians are doing, much as their own oppressors in collusion with western powers have done for generations. But the fact is, the Egyptians have taken to the streets because in their judgment they have had enough.

Like I said before, I'm not passing any judgement on the developments. Desperate populations do desperate things. But with no possibility of a positive outcome anywhere in the horizon, I'm not going to do high fives or wax lyrical about what bliss it was etc. Instead, I feel badly for the mounting death toll and the generation or two that will never know happiness, the pursuit of which was one of the promised liberties of the revolution.

by charvaka Sun Nov 27, 2011 3:05 pm

MD wrote:The topic of my writing has not been the change per se but the dogmatic certainty with which change-cheerleaders think it is good for Egypt.

So you worry about change, and I welcome change. Neither of us knows how it will turn out in the end. This all amounts to you being a glass-half-empty sort of of guy, and me being a glass-half-full sort of guy. No big deal either way; the far more interesting story is what is actually happening in Egypt -- not whether some insignificant poster on some little-read forum supports or opposes the change! So I will leave you to your balloon-puncturing.

by charvaka Mon Nov 28, 2011 3:09 am

Merlot, your reference to the Wordsworth poem made me look up my original post. Turns out, contrary to your assertion up above that "dewy-eyed cheerleaders for people power refused to acknowledge" the perils facing Egypt, this is what I actually said there:

charvaka on old CH wrote:A poem written for another revolution (arguably the mother of all revolutions), and one with both parallels to today's Egypt and a direct impact on Egypt back in the day. The question now is whether a Reign of Terror follows this glorious dawn. And whether others in the Middle East take inspiration from this and rise up to claim their own rights and freedoms.

http://forums.sulekha.com/forums/coffeehouse/bliss-was-it-in-that-dawn-to-be-alive-but-to-be-young-was-very-heaven-1091623.htm

by Merlot Daruwala Mon Nov 28, 2011 4:23 am

Haha...very astute and insightful of you to put in that one question in the middle of all that bliss-laden lyricism. I totally take back my words.

What is clear though, is that dogmatic cheerleaders of people power believe that the mere deposition of a despot makes for a glorious dawn, full of bliss and heavenly pleasure for the young (presumably when they meet their untimely deaths), even when it's followed by reigns of terror that claim the lives of tens of thousands of people and many many decades of authoritarian rule and a new despot.

by charvaka Mon Nov 28, 2011 7:42 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Haha...very astute and insightful of you to put in that one question in the middle of all that bliss-laden lyricism.

Thank you. Very negligent and careless of you to claim the exact opposite earlier, though.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:dogmatic cheerleaders of people power believe that the mere deposition of a despot makes for a glorious dawn, full of bliss and heavenly pleasure for the young (presumably when they meet their untimely deaths), even when it's followed by reigns of terror that claim the lives of tens of thousands of people and many many decades of authoritarian rule and a new despot.

When I look at the French Revolution today, do I feel badly about the fall of Bastille? I do not. I feel bad about the Reign of Terror, but that doesn't take anything away from the momentous events of July 1789 and their importance in human history. Perhaps you think the French would have been better off living under the feudal yoke rather than go through the intense trauma of revolution. Thankfully, despite the many worries and concerns of wise, pussyfooting status-quoists, the world does not stand still. And for the most part, it gets better rather than worse.

by Merlot Daruwala Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:38 am

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:Haha...very astute and insightful of you to put in that one question in the middle of all that bliss-laden lyricism.
Thank you. Very negligent and careless of you to claim the exact opposite earlier, though.

Sir, I'm neither the lord of Google, nor are your posts so important that I'd recall an 10-word disclaimer in the middle of a 500-word, bliss-laden post from one year ago. All I recall was the Wordsworthian joy with which you'd welcomed that dawn and my wondering at the time, how one could experience such unqualified joy when we'd witnessed at close quarters, the complete chaos and disintegration of a society and all the human suffering that had followed when a similar deposition took place in Iraq just a few years back.

charvaka wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:dogmatic cheerleaders of people power believe that the mere deposition of a despot makes for a glorious dawn, full of bliss and heavenly pleasure for the young (presumably when they meet their untimely deaths), even when it's followed by reigns of terror that claim the lives of tens of thousands of people and many many decades of authoritarian rule and a new despot.
When I look at the French Revolution today, do I feel badly about the fall of Bastille? I do not. I feel bad about the Reign of Terror, but that doesn't take anything away from the momentous events of July 1789 and their importance in human history.

For much of the immediate century that followed that bliss-laden dawn, the lot of the French people was actually much worse -- with even the loss of personal liberties - than before. For the tens of thousands who got guillotined - and their families - there'd be little comfort in knowing that all those momentous events would be viewed as hugely important by historians some centuries later.

Ironically, after waxing so eloquently about that bliss-laden dawn, Wordsworth himself paid a huge personal price: he was separated from his wife and daughter for decades thereafter and nearly lost his mind while France went through its revolutionary convulsions and got into a war with Britain.

So while I agree with you that the French revolution was a great breakthrough in the evolution of societies and governance, knowing as we do the terrible things that followed, it's criminally callous IMO to hail the events of 1789 as a source of much joy and bliss when in reality, it just marked the onset of more pain, misery and death to the French people. So also with Egypt. In the long term many of of these things might turn out to be phenomenally wonderful for Egypt and the region, but in the long term, we're dead anyway. In the meantime, one has a messy reality to contend with - and that certainly is nothing to cheer about for anyone who cares for the human condition. And this is the fundamental difference in our perspectives; not the half-full / half-empty glass analogy you were trying to draw yesterday.

by charvaka Tue Nov 29, 2011 1:49 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:my wondering at the time, how one could experience such unqualified joy

If you had only paused to read, you wouldn't have thought of that as unqualified. Oh well.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:the French revolution was a great breakthrough in the evolution of societies and governance... In the long term many of of these things might turn out to be phenomenally wonderful for Egypt and the region

I tend to focus on the possibilities for positive change. You don't.

by Merlot Daruwala Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:48 am

*Bump*

by Hellsangel Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:53 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:*Bump*

Ha ha ha! This has been discussed in multiple threads now. The gooey eyed bicoastal Liberals are all hopeful.

by Idéfix Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:23 pm

Merlot Daruwala wrote:*Bump*

Thanks for reminding me of that discussion. Recent events in Egypt make me feel better on one count: that the Muslim Brotherhood won't succeed in making it another Iran. It is of course a tinderbox and things can always get worse before they get better in a society that lacks both democratic institutions and popular leaders who are committed to democracy. I hope the liberals can fashion a coalition that gets more support in the next elections and do a better job at governing than Morsi.

by Idéfix Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:25 pm

Hellsangel wrote:Ha ha ha! This has been discussed in multiple threads now. The gooey eyed bicoastal Liberals are all hopeful.

by truthbetold Mon Jul 08, 2013 8:54 pm

Idefix,
Thanks for the clip.
Merlot,
I quickly read this old thread. Charvaka and I said what we felt then. Current events demonstrate the torturous path of a new society formation. I will repeat what I wrote above. If you feel current events contradict anything I said or charvaka said, take time to point them. We can have a mature conversation with real world events to back our words.

by Hellsangel Mon Jul 08, 2013 10:20 pm

Dogmatix, I watched the West Wing live all seasons. It was a comforting alternate Universe for the Liberals during the Bush presidency - both terms. I know how much Liberals hankered for a Bartlett presidency. And how they played down 9/11 as some idiotic lock down and the Lewinsky scandal with some stupid health issue. And hooray, the first Latino President went on to continue a Democratic Administration once Congressman Santos was elected. Janel Moloney was cute though.

by Idéfix Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:08 pm

Trust you to ignore the substance and focus on the fiction and drama. If you have a counter to the factual argument about liberalism and conservatism, fell free to articulate it.

by Hellsangel Mon Jul 08, 2013 11:12 pm

Idéfix wrote:Trust you to ignore the substance and focus on the fiction and drama. If you have a counter to the factual argument about liberalism and conservatism, fell free to articulate it.

You mean you want me to post a video of Sean Hannity or Bill O'Reilly or Michelle Malkin defining Liberalism? Let me find one. Maybe tomorrow.

by Merlot Daruwala Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:40 am

Idéfix wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:*Bump*
Thanks for reminding me of that discussion. Recent events in Egypt make me feel better on one count: that the Muslim Brotherhood won't succeed in making it another Iran. It is of course a tinderbox and things can always get worse before they get better in a society that lacks both democratic institutions and popular leaders who are committed to democracy. I hope the liberals can fashion a coalition that gets more support in the next elections and do a better job at governing than Morsi.

I feel better on this count: your view on Egypt is now far more circumspect and cautious compared to those bliss-laden hosannas for people power from two years back.

The army has played its cards cleverly. Knowing how the West is a sucker for haha..the power of the people, they simply rallied thousands of civilians on the streets and used that as an excuse to overthrow a democratically elected government. Congenitally incapable of faulting mob action, our champions of democracy are now reduced to having to defend the coup as the price for defeating Islamism, even if it is the same ideology that won Morsi the democratic vote in the first place.

Seems to me that your support for institutional democracy in Egypt, is conditional: iff the Egyptians vote to power a regime that you like, embodying Western liberalism. This is not very different from the classical US policy in the third world, of propping up puppet regimes modeled in their own image, highly dependent on US largesse for survival.

by Idéfix Tue Jul 09, 2013 1:35 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:Seems to me that your support for institutional democracy in Egypt, is conditional: iff the Egyptians vote to power a regime that you like, embodying Western liberalism.

I don't quite seek Western liberalism for Egypt, because that would be out of touch with the values of Egyptian society. I think any political leadership that is too far ahead of its people risks sparking unrest, just as a political leadership that is too far behind its people would. Regardless of what I might find attractive, governments that are not too far apart from the values of the majority of people tend to be more stable. Now, the aesthetic question is whether one likes the political leadership to be slightly ahead of the people and leading them forward, or slightly behind its people and dragging them back to old ways. I much prefer that leaders lead their people towards positive change, rather than hold them back. I prefer that liberals be in power in Egypt rather than conservatives. Actually I prefer that pretty much everywhere in the world, while recognizing that a mainstream American liberal leader looks like a mainstream French conservative leader, and an Egyptian liberal leader looks like an American social conservative leader.

Despite this personal preference, I was not upset when Morsi was elected in a fair election. My problem with Morsi, as that of the millions who came out in protest against him, was that he sought to make constitutional changes that favored Islamists and transform the revolution into an Islamic revolution that eventually snuffs out individual freedoms.

Merlot Daruwala wrote:This is not very different from the classical US policy in the third world, of propping up puppet regimes modeled in their own image, highly dependent on US largesse for survival.

Actually most of the puppet regimes the US propped up were not at all in the image of the US. Pinochet and Zia were not elected to office, and they did not run governments with constitutional checks and balances.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:00 am

For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:08 am

There is one thing none of the Intellectuals of SuCH wants to mention.

That is the simple fact - a fact a nobody like me - mentioned long back. The Muslim countries dont have a tradition of democracy and that too the Arabs. Democracy runs COUNTER to the very book they swear to follow.

There lies the problem. There will be no TRULY democratic Egypt - ever.

by Merlot Daruwala Wed Jul 10, 2013 1:16 am

Marathadi-Saamiyaar wrote:There is one thing none of the Intellectuals of SuCH wants to mention.

That is the simple fact - a fact a nobody like me - mentioned long back. The Muslim countries dont have a tradition of democracy and that too the Arabs. Democracy runs COUNTER to the very book they swear to follow.

There lies the problem. There will be no TRULY democratic Egypt - ever.

Hellsu made this point very early on in this very thread.

by Propagandhi711 Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:18 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.

what would you recommend they should be doing? egyptians and other cursed 3rd worlders living without many rights I mean.

by Marathadi-Saamiyaar Wed Jul 10, 2013 10:49 am

Propagandhi711 wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.

what would you recommend they should be doing? egyptians and other cursed 3rd worlders living without many rights I mean.

That used to be the old terminology.

Now it is the followers of the BookS. Even Burma, Phillipines, Indonesia have some sort of democracy. Who knows.. even China might follow Taiwanese example. But, not the Ummah countries.

by Idéfix Thu Jul 11, 2013 12:32 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.

It is the Egpytian people in their millions who made the choice to fight for their freedom. They are not as stupid as you seem to think they are. The feelings of people like myself have little to no impact or influence on their choices. There is a lot of inappropriate conceit in the notion that you know what's better for the Egyptians than they themselves do, that they ought not to tread that tortuous path to liberty.

Max already asked you this. If it was up to you, what would you rather have the Egyptians do? Continue to tolerate Mubarak until he died and then let Gamal take over from dad and rule for another generation?

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Jul 11, 2013 2:34 am

Idéfix wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.
It is the Egpytian people in their millions who made the choice to fight for their freedom. They are not as stupid as you seem to think they are. The feelings of people like myself have little to no impact or influence on their choices. There is a lot of inappropriate conceit in the notion that you know what's better for the Egyptians than they themselves do, that they ought not to tread that tortuous path to liberty.

Max already asked you this. If it was up to you, what would you rather have the Egyptians do? Continue to tolerate Mubarak until he died and then let Gamal take over from dad and rule for another generation?

You (and Propa - not Max) are missing my point. I do not claim to have any answers for the tough choices the Egyptians face, and have zero advice for them. The Egyptians will do whatever they have to do, and tread whatever path they choose to take.

My only point is about the inappropriateness of cheering on with ideological fervor, even when it is evident that Egypt has descended into an extended period of chaos. And even as that chaos consumes the lives of an entire generation or two, it just seems so unseemly and tone-deaf to talk about bliss and what heaven it is to be young in Egypt.

The only conceit on display here is the certainty that the Egyptians are on the right track to eventually attain the American concept of liberty and happiness, and that the human tragedy that is unfolding right now is an insignificant blip in the grand sweep of history.

by Idéfix Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:05 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:
Idéfix wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:For those cheerleaders of people power out there, here's a sobering analysis of the mob-action in Egypt and what it implies for democracy in the third world.

Far from any of the bliss they are supposed to be feeling, the people of Egypt are now cursed to go through a prolonged period of political instability, violence, unemployment and economic ruin. An entire generation of youngsters will know nothing but misery and hopelessness, even as the champions of democracy sitting in the comfort of their first world living rooms nod knowingly about the torturous and difficult path to liberty.
It is the Egpytian people in their millions who made the choice to fight for their freedom. They are not as stupid as you seem to think they are. The feelings of people like myself have little to no impact or influence on their choices. There is a lot of inappropriate conceit in the notion that you know what's better for the Egyptians than they themselves do, that they ought not to tread that tortuous path to liberty.

Max already asked you this. If it was up to you, what would you rather have the Egyptians do? Continue to tolerate Mubarak until he died and then let Gamal take over from dad and rule for another generation?

You (and Propa - not Max) are missing my point. I do not claim to have any answers for the tough choices the Egyptians face, and have zero advice for them. The Egyptians will do whatever they have to do, and tread whatever path they choose to take.

My only point is about the inappropriateness of cheering on with ideological fervor, even when it is evident that Egypt has descended into an extended period of chaos. And even as that chaos consumes the lives of an entire generation or two, it just seems so unseemly and tone-deaf to talk about bliss and what heaven it is to be young in Egypt.

The only conceit on display here is the certainty that the Egyptians are on the right track to eventually attain the American concept of liberty and happiness, and that the human tragedy that is unfolding right now is an insignificant blip in the grand sweep of history.

Oh, then we are back to what we discussed more than a year ago: https://such.forumotion.com/t3701-old-order-stifles-the-birth-of-a-new-egypt#30789

by Idéfix Thu Jul 11, 2013 3:10 am

Merlot Daruwala wrote:The only conceit on display here is the certainty that the Egyptians are on the right track to eventually attain the American concept of liberty and happiness, and that the human tragedy that is unfolding right now is an insignificant blip in the grand sweep of history.

I don't believe that liberty and happiness are exclusively American concepts in perpetuity. I believe that thinking of them as American concepts in perpetuity is a form of conceit in itself, that other cultures are incapable of aspiring to and achieving those goals. I believe that liberty and the pursuit of happiness are universal human aspirations that all cultures have been marching towards throughout their history. And yes, I do believe that in the long run things tend to change for the better. As I said several times on this thread, I fully expect things may get worse in Egypt before they get better, but I still applaud the Egyptian people for striving to throw off their shackles. I don't see why being neutral about that development is better than applauding it.

by Merlot Daruwala Thu Jul 11, 2013 5:53 am

Idéfix wrote:
Merlot Daruwala wrote:The only conceit on display here is the certainty that the Egyptians are on the right track to eventually attain the American concept of liberty and happiness, and that the human tragedy that is unfolding right now is an insignificant blip in the grand sweep of history.
I don't believe that liberty and happiness are exclusively American concepts in perpetuity. I believe that thinking of them as American concepts in perpetuity is a form of conceit in itself, that other cultures are incapable of aspiring to and achieving those goals. I believe that liberty and the pursuit of happiness are universal human aspirations that all cultures have been marching towards throughout their history.

The pursuit of happiness is certainly a universal aspiration, but the sources of happiness vary. In the case of the US, individual liberty itself has been fetishized as the source of happiness (and yet when the South asked for the liberty to secede, they faced bullets and bayonets). But it is presumptuous (and a conceit) to imagine that this is universal. In Bhutan, the land of the happiest people in the world, happiness comes from embracing isolation and giving up personal liberties to conform to tradition. In Singapore, happiness comes from the economic prosperity and the sheer order and efficiency in governance that no democracy can ever match.

In Egypt, sure there is a Westernized, urban middle-class which desires these individual rights but let us not forget that there is a largely rural society which wants Shariah and which voted the Muslim Brotherhood to power. It is conceit to judge the pursuit of happiness of one group of Egyptians as being superior to that of another group, simply because the former's worldview matches one's own.

Idéfix wrote:And yes, I do believe that in the long run things tend to change for the better....I don't see why being neutral about that development is better than applauding it.

In the long run, the current set of Egyptians will be dead, having lived their lives in misery and pain. And watching a human tragedy unfold in front of you, if you still see nothing wrong in talking about feeling bliss and heaven, then there really is nothing more I have to say to you on the topic.

by Hellsangel Fri Jul 12, 2013 10:23 am

Dueling videos:

by Sponsored content