Weekend Sober Thread: Shit's Gettin' Real in Egypt

I mean, if you disregard things like geography, economics and regional history, I guess you could be right. The Saudi per capita income is insane by comparison to the rest of the region. Native Saudis have no reason to revolt beyond religious and political ideology, and those kinds of uprisings can be and are quieted quickly. Even the foreigners who work there who might have some legitimate grievances against the regime do a simple cost-benefit analysis: work in Saudi and suffer its injustices, or go home and starve. Revolutions are, have been, and will always be about money. If your people have food, homes and jobs, they don't care who's giving them to them, and they'll suffer a lot to hold on to them.

 

In case any one hasn't checked it out yet, Al Jazeera English is doing 24hr live streams. The people control everything but the main thoroughfares, which supposedly friendly police guard.

Quite a few major buildings on fire, again.

<a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://english.aljazeera.net/watch_now/</a>

 

Washington Post has a good article on the situation today: <a class="postlink" href="http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/28/AR2011012806404.html?sid=ST2011012806535" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 1012806535</a>

TL;DR summary: Police forces seem to have allied with protesters and are not only permitting protests, but actively encouraging them. Curfews and off-limits areas are being ignored. At this point, I can't see how Mubarak can possibly remain in power after all this is over, which will hopefully be soon.

edit: Seems a good chunk of the army is defying orders as well.

 

One of the reporters on the street was interviewing a man that is familiar with Alexandria's police forces, some of which were directing the looters.

 

The thing is that removal of tyrants is not ipso facto a solution to anything, and often is worse than the previous state of affairs. The tsar of Russia was a tyrant; those guys that followed him, however, I'm none too keen on. The same might be argued for Batista and Castro, the Shah and Khomeini. The record of "people's revolutions" is quite mixed. I'm not saying that I think there are Leninists and Stalinists lurking in the shadows in Egypt, but "tyrants vs. the people" is often an overly simplistic dichotomy, and quite frankly, sometimes "the people" are worse.

This assumes the people like us.

 

History has shown that it is far easier to move from one dictator to the next with out breaking the cycle; its just as possible that an Islamic Theocracy gains hold as a democracy. I think we in America take our republic for granted, Washington had been offered the title of King and refused.

Edit:

Huge props to this female reporter on the AJ stream. She should win a gold for jaw-gymnastics and pronunciation of names.

 

I agree that sometimes the people are worse. But, I don't believe that's a strong enough argument to deny them the right to a free and democratic government.

This is somewhat analogous to freedom of speech in the US. Given the choice between hearing nothing but hateful, obscene, idiotic diatribe and having severe restrictions on freedom of speech, I'm going to side with freedom.

 

I completely agree. If the American government were to provide material to support to Mubarrak, I would be upset for that exact reason. I've been hopeful that ElBaradei, who I see as having a ton of potential for leadership, would somehow succeed him. My point is merely that it is unclear that this is something that we as Westerners should be happy about on the balance.

 

I know, which is why I I see this a sign of hope, nothing concrete. However, early indications are good. On the Al-Jazeera live stream (high recommend, by the way) they had the leader of the Islamic Brotherhood on the phone and even he said that they want democracy. ElBaradei, the major opposition leader is saying the same thing: democracy. Assuming these people are not bullshitting to gain power, this revolution looks like it is based primarily around the pursuit of democracy, which is something sorely needed in the region. As far as political change goes, the change from dictatorship to democracy is almost always a good one.

 

Worse for who? Us or them? With regard to the Mubarak regime's value as a U.S. ally, the alleged stability that the man provided and that the U.S. desired was a direct cause of the kind of extremist empowerment we declared war on in 2001. Yes, Egypt under Mubarak is pro-Israel and anti-Islamic fundamentalism, but the man's bill for services provided was a lopsided economy and political oppression that had Egyptians thirsting for an alternative. The Muslim Brotherhood is not prominent because people are making calculated judgments about its sociopolitical policies. As they see it, there is "Mubarak" and there is "Not Mubarak". And the Muslim Brotherhood is nothing if Not Mubarak. That's been the rationale for popular support of most revolutionary groups, hasn't it? Not necessarily a better choice, but at least a different one, and who could blame them for making it if they are literally the only resilient voice of opposition?

My point is that Mubarak's administration is now a detriment to our interests. Even if he manages to retain power, that kind of iron-fisted approach would breed terrorist efforts like maggots on day-old beef. Now that police and military loyalties are wavering, he holds no cards. He screwed up very badly with these protests. One way or another, he's a liability and he has to go.

At first glance, this might seem like a formulaic scenario for power grabs by dangerous people. The difference as I see it lies in facts about Egypt that have already been outlined: because of their exposure to Western culture, the people understand the benefits of moderate, developed nationhood. This isn't a peasant uprising. These are doctors, lawyers and grad students in the streets. They are better educated and therefore less prone to support leaders who might put them in a position to lose what they already have. Simply put, they aren't blind. They could not possibly see any benefit to adopting an Iranian-style totalitarianism, having spent 30 years watching that country screw itself over on the stage of world politics. Add to this the fact that most reports of these protests explicitly point out their secular nature, I think fears of a fundamentalist filling of the power vacuum are wildly overblown.

 

As dubya tee eff pointed out, one of the people to watch is ElBaradei. He's been the leader in calling for democratic replacement of Mubarrek for years. The man is a Nobel peace Prize winner, highly intelligent (he holds a PhD), and avowedly NOT a Muslim extremist. The Muslim Brotherhood will not be gaining a foothold under his approval; I'm cautiously trusting as long as he is involved.

Agreed. I'm firmly anti-Mubarrek. I'm just uneasy because we do not know what Not-Mubarrek looks like.

 

Frankly, at this point, we'd better hope these protesters can follow through and depose the man. Worry about the after-effects as they come, because if Mubarak stays and we don't denounce him (and I guarantee that if he does, we won't) it's another black mark for U.S. foreign relations in the Middle East, and another Arab nation with the potential to develop violent domestic extremist groups that could now have considerable popular support.

 

Oh, I'm sure they'll find a way.

 

The same way we supported Pervez Musharraf, and still support King Abdullah Bin Abdul-Aziz: the perceived benefits of the relationships outweigh the negative effects of our hypocrisy. Philosophy is a red herring.

Again, though, Mubarak appears to have squandered this arrangement, and if he can't do what we need him to do, we have no reason to hold his hand any longer.

 

A little off topic, but what's the update with Tunisia?

 

Also, whats up in Yemen? I saw reports of much smaller protests earlier in the day. Wonder if there will be more reports tomorrow morning?

 

I can't speak to how Al Jazeera normally operates, but I'm impressed with the quality and professionalism of the live stream. I haven't heard anyone called a nazi, no one running around screaming at chalkboards, no attempt to cram all the world's problems into a 45 second debate.

And wow, the dubbing is fucking fantastic. It syncs up so well with their mouths you'd think everyone in Egypt spoke English.

 

Don't confuse the words Democracy, and Freedom. Democracy is only the freedom to choose your government. It is not a guarantee of freedoms afterwards.

 

The leader of the Muslim Brotherhood has announced that they are supporting democracy, but do not intend to be a part of the government or have a presidential candidate.

First time I've wanted a radical Muslim leader to follow through on his claims.

 

I don't know, but here is an excellent article pretty much agreeing with what BrianH said about the socioeconomic stuff going on.

<a class="postlink" href="http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/opinion/2011/01/201111413424337867.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://english.aljazeera.net/indepth/op ... 37867.html</a>