I don’t think we are ready for democracy, with 40% illetrates, and islamists trying to jump onto power to dictate their agenda, its better to have stability than chaos the Iraq style. refer to my article
umm…. so much for literacy!!! haha!
why would literacy prevent people from being ready for a democracy? in fact democracy might empower those who have no power and no rights! and i wouldn’t say that egypt is all that stable either.. I think what you are trying to say is: ‘better the devil you know’.
“I don’t think we are ready for democracy, with 40% illetrates, and islamists trying to jump onto power to dictate their agenda, its better to have stability than chaos the Iraq style.”
That’s exactly what I used to hear from my high school friends who went to the Police Academy, whenever I asked them whether they’ll be comfortable being repression tools in Mubarak’s hands.
I heard this view too from Sherif Wally, NDP member who came to lecture us at the AUC on the need to keep Egypt as it is, lest we turn into Iran. (Now it’s Iraq, according to you.)
Your views are incredibly elitist, and include so much scorn to the people. You should thank your luck you were born to a family that can afford you education, and not in some slum… I’m sure your views would be different then.
I think an illiterate person who manages a family of 8 on LE200 a month could be a better minister of economy when it comes to the talent of allocating resources.
Very well said:)
education helps…but you also need the free and equal opportunity to acquire it, you also need to have a well-informed citizenry. on the one hand, you need talented people and open process of choosing accountable leadership. on the other, you can’t wait too much for that to eventually come, political and socio-economic environments can worsen with time. Poltiical and socio-economic improvement, no doubt, will require enormous efforts–especially, and primarily, grassroots-based efforts (and momentum) towards development.
One may be tempted to see as the “chicken-or-the-egg,-what-came- first?” dilemma. Development/Improvement, I have come to believe, cannot be implemented successfully in a top-down, imposed manner–though assistance at some or various points will be required from decision-making and affluent classes of the society. Yet, the basis and focus of assistance needs to be formed with a bottoms-up orientation. Perhaps, a mentality that incorporates and blends profit-making and expansion of economy and wealth, with corporate social responsibility, economic efficiency, and expansion of social/economic/educational opportunities for the society (especially the less fortunate classes)–in short, a realistic sustainable development course that takes into account the society’s, and the less fortunates’ needs and expands their horizons. Anything else, I fear, will add to a process of either retarded development or disproportionate development–artifically widing socio-economic gaps further, and polarizing classes of the society further.
Just as important, political development (including liberalization and democratization) needs to go hand-in-hand and alongside with socio-economic development, and such an emphasis may be more realistically effective. Saying or thinking that “we have to wait” is NO EXECUSE OR JUSTIFICATION for pursuing this dual-track course. Waiting may give the public an impression that little or no tangible, effective, and realistic progress is being made. Still worse, it may create the impression that the public is not entitled even to the promise of such progress being forseen in the near or far future or present.
meant to say: Saying or thinking “we have to wait” provides NO JUSTIFICATION OR EXCUSE for IGNORING the dual-track course.
Sorry, was typing too fast. :).
finally, i don’t understand the comparison linking current Iraqi society to a hypothetical Egyptian one. Iraqi society–and correct me if I am wrong–has had more of a shaky multi-sectarian/theological and tribalistic-familial leadership-type makeup than Egyptian society either traditionally or historically. Surely, there have been some dabbles of issues and flashy points, but nothing that I have seen that would suggest an eruption of sectarian strife being built up of the kind that we have been witnessing in Iraq–at least one would hope not so. And surely, autocracy/despotism has existed in both societies, and mistreatment of minorities have also occured.
But I get the impression that in Iraq, unlike Egypt, what was seen as the significant marginalized groups (i.e. Shia, Kurds) were deliberately left out of opportunity to participate in decision-making circles/governing posts, while minorities in Egypt have been included. Repression against significant minorities in Egypt (generally speaking) seems not to be (relatively speaking) as systemic and systematic as repression against the above-named marginalized segments in Iraq.
Nor would I anticipate a complete breakdown of security or dismantling of security apparatus, should a substantial democratization process take place. Egyptian society is not as theologically-or sectarian-fractured to allow for an intense and brutal competition as a process to fill a power vaccum. And even though, Egypt remains as a strategic political, cultural, social (and to some extent, economic) partner/ally in the international community, what strong-enough incentives would render Egypt into an international battleground for various foreign interests to proxy their wars/grievings/conflicts with others–given the makeup of the Egyptian society socially, economically, politically, and otherwise? In the scheme of things, I would bet (accurately, I hope) that Egypt is large or potent enough of a “power-keg” through which regional and international interests could hope exercise such conflicts, grievances, wars successfully.
So, other than the suggested specter of the “Islamist” segments in both societies, I don’t see the comparison likening Iraq to Egypt as holding up very much. But even here, too, the comparison might not hold up well because of the danger of inaccuracy lumping all of spectrum into one group–in other words, treating this segment or any other segment in the society as a monolyth. While extremism, rigidity, and lack of pragmatism exists in multiple segments of the society (Secularists and Islamists included) both in Iraq and Egypt, the characteristics, and degree of moderation or extremism, of these segments overall and in their individual parts will vary from group to group within the society, whether Iraq or in Egypt. The segments will also differ overall/collectively, given the differences in the makeup, histories, evolutions, and current developments within and related to Egypt and Iraq. As so, taking all of this into account, I would conclude–at least for now–that, even here, Egypt is a far way from being another Iraq.
sorry, fast-typing again, with typos.
Meant to say: I would bet (accurately, I hope) that Egypt is NOT large or potent enough of a “power keg”…
I don’t think we are ready for democracy, with 40% illetrates, and islamists trying to jump onto power to dictate their agenda, its better to have stability than chaos the Iraq style. refer to my article
umm…. so much for literacy!!! haha!
why would literacy prevent people from being ready for a democracy? in fact democracy might empower those who have no power and no rights! and i wouldn’t say that egypt is all that stable either.. I think what you are trying to say is: ‘better the devil you know’.
“I don’t think we are ready for democracy, with 40% illetrates, and islamists trying to jump onto power to dictate their agenda, its better to have stability than chaos the Iraq style.”
That’s exactly what I used to hear from my high school friends who went to the Police Academy, whenever I asked them whether they’ll be comfortable being repression tools in Mubarak’s hands.
I heard this view too from Sherif Wally, NDP member who came to lecture us at the AUC on the need to keep Egypt as it is, lest we turn into Iran. (Now it’s Iraq, according to you.)
Your views are incredibly elitist, and include so much scorn to the people. You should thank your luck you were born to a family that can afford you education, and not in some slum… I’m sure your views would be different then.
I think an illiterate person who manages a family of 8 on LE200 a month could be a better minister of economy when it comes to the talent of allocating resources.
Very well said:)
education helps…but you also need the free and equal opportunity to acquire it, you also need to have a well-informed citizenry. on the one hand, you need talented people and open process of choosing accountable leadership. on the other, you can’t wait too much for that to eventually come, political and socio-economic environments can worsen with time. Poltiical and socio-economic improvement, no doubt, will require enormous efforts–especially, and primarily, grassroots-based efforts (and momentum) towards development.
One may be tempted to see as the “chicken-or-the-egg,-what-came- first?” dilemma. Development/Improvement, I have come to believe, cannot be implemented successfully in a top-down, imposed manner–though assistance at some or various points will be required from decision-making and affluent classes of the society. Yet, the basis and focus of assistance needs to be formed with a bottoms-up orientation. Perhaps, a mentality that incorporates and blends profit-making and expansion of economy and wealth, with corporate social responsibility, economic efficiency, and expansion of social/economic/educational opportunities for the society (especially the less fortunate classes)–in short, a realistic sustainable development course that takes into account the society’s, and the less fortunates’ needs and expands their horizons. Anything else, I fear, will add to a process of either retarded development or disproportionate development–artifically widing socio-economic gaps further, and polarizing classes of the society further.
Just as important, political development (including liberalization and democratization) needs to go hand-in-hand and alongside with socio-economic development, and such an emphasis may be more realistically effective. Saying or thinking that “we have to wait” is NO EXECUSE OR JUSTIFICATION for pursuing this dual-track course. Waiting may give the public an impression that little or no tangible, effective, and realistic progress is being made. Still worse, it may create the impression that the public is not entitled even to the promise of such progress being forseen in the near or far future or present.
meant to say: Saying or thinking “we have to wait” provides NO JUSTIFICATION OR EXCUSE for IGNORING the dual-track course.
Sorry, was typing too fast. :).
finally, i don’t understand the comparison linking current Iraqi society to a hypothetical Egyptian one. Iraqi society–and correct me if I am wrong–has had more of a shaky multi-sectarian/theological and tribalistic-familial leadership-type makeup than Egyptian society either traditionally or historically. Surely, there have been some dabbles of issues and flashy points, but nothing that I have seen that would suggest an eruption of sectarian strife being built up of the kind that we have been witnessing in Iraq–at least one would hope not so. And surely, autocracy/despotism has existed in both societies, and mistreatment of minorities have also occured.
But I get the impression that in Iraq, unlike Egypt, what was seen as the significant marginalized groups (i.e. Shia, Kurds) were deliberately left out of opportunity to participate in decision-making circles/governing posts, while minorities in Egypt have been included. Repression against significant minorities in Egypt (generally speaking) seems not to be (relatively speaking) as systemic and systematic as repression against the above-named marginalized segments in Iraq.
Nor would I anticipate a complete breakdown of security or dismantling of security apparatus, should a substantial democratization process take place. Egyptian society is not as theologically-or sectarian-fractured to allow for an intense and brutal competition as a process to fill a power vaccum. And even though, Egypt remains as a strategic political, cultural, social (and to some extent, economic) partner/ally in the international community, what strong-enough incentives would render Egypt into an international battleground for various foreign interests to proxy their wars/grievings/conflicts with others–given the makeup of the Egyptian society socially, economically, politically, and otherwise? In the scheme of things, I would bet (accurately, I hope) that Egypt is large or potent enough of a “power-keg” through which regional and international interests could hope exercise such conflicts, grievances, wars successfully.
So, other than the suggested specter of the “Islamist” segments in both societies, I don’t see the comparison likening Iraq to Egypt as holding up very much. But even here, too, the comparison might not hold up well because of the danger of inaccuracy lumping all of spectrum into one group–in other words, treating this segment or any other segment in the society as a monolyth. While extremism, rigidity, and lack of pragmatism exists in multiple segments of the society (Secularists and Islamists included) both in Iraq and Egypt, the characteristics, and degree of moderation or extremism, of these segments overall and in their individual parts will vary from group to group within the society, whether Iraq or in Egypt. The segments will also differ overall/collectively, given the differences in the makeup, histories, evolutions, and current developments within and related to Egypt and Iraq. As so, taking all of this into account, I would conclude–at least for now–that, even here, Egypt is a far way from being another Iraq.
sorry, fast-typing again, with typos.
Meant to say: I would bet (accurately, I hope) that Egypt is NOT large or potent enough of a “power keg”…