By: issandr

issandr — Wed, 18 Apr 2007 08:10:21 +0000

Interesting, Hossam. But don’t you think that revolutionary socialists in Egypt have to prioritize in terms of forming broad alliances first with groups that have completely different points of view (such as the Islamists) and worrying about social policy later? I very much — more than most “analysts” — give credit to Kifaya and the Egyptian left for having started the movement of dissidence that has taken over the political class of this country in the past two years. In many ways, the ikhwan have been playing catch-up to this attitude, as have the centrist-leftists and liberals. But the radical left could have created the current mood alone.

There is also another thing to worry about. Perhaps the leading organizers of the Iranian revolution were left-leaning students and socialists/communist groups, includng weird leftist-Islamist groups. But when the time for the leadership battle for the revolution came, a radical Islamist movement (led by Khomeini, who in many ways broke with standard Shia fiqh) got the upper hand with the suppport of reactionary social forces (clerics, bazaaris, etc.) This is many people’s nightmare scenario for Egypt, particularly among major power brokers in the political system (security establishment, business elite, the Americans)

Perhaps the best hope for Egypt’s radical left is not to vie for the leadership at the top, where it stands little chance, but build up resilient grassroots networks to defend the interests of those it claims to represents (the workers, the poor, etc.) The activities surrounding labor groups is a good example of that, and could be a good basis for strong parliamentary representation in a distant future of free and fair elections.

Comments on: Permanent Revolution: Then and now

By: issandr