Monday, February 14, 2011

Too Soon to Say

I think the rush to lionize the Egyptian revolution in certain quarters and to treat it as a vindication of whatever one believes about political change is self-serving and not a little bit naive. The proper approach is to heed the advice of Zhou Enlai. My heart is with the protesters, and their purer expressions of joy are very moving, but the country has passed from emergency rule to martial law. I am not making this observation in order to denigrate the Egyptian people, their role in the removal of Mubarack, or their plain aspirations for a freer life, but a six-month, military-guided "transition to democracy" is a thing about which we should inherently be suspect. As to what will become of those people and their country, it's a question whose answer will be measured in years at least.

Posted by IOZ at 9:32 AM | email »
Labels: ,

24 comments:

Ethan said...

I'm not sure who it is that you're seeing being elated about the military rule.

10:09 AM
Anonymous said...

I'm not sure who it is

Every English-speaking protester I heard interviewed after El Hosni left was just elated that he's gone and basically gave implicit consent to martial law under the circumstances, even if they expressed suspicion about the military's ability to transition (if you will).

10:28 AM
Anonymous said...

Every English-speaking protester I heard interviewed...

A representative sample of the people, surely.

10:36 AM
Ethan said...

Yeah, there's that, and also the first nonny must have been seeing different interviews than I was, because every one I saw went like this:

"Just let us celebrate tonight. Tomorrow we get to work. If we don't get what we want, we're not going anywhere."

And, in case anyone has lost interest, if you just glance in at what's going on in Egypt now, you'll see that the revolution hasn't stopped. Who could have predicted?

10:39 AM
Charles F. Oxtrot said...

The only sagacious cautionary response from anyone who isn't a native Egyptian watching things unfold firsthand is this:

it's not over yet

If the civil government couldn't stand up to the protest, why would one wager the military government will be different? The military was accessible to the civil governmental leaders who cowed and caved.

Of course it could be a Trojan Horse, too. Sucker 'em into central Cairo, then nuke the place. Voila, no more revolutionary impulse.

Little Eretz Yisroel will happily nuke Cairo for his uncle Samuel.

10:42 AM
Anonymous said...

Just let us celebrate tonight. Tomorrow we get to work. If we don't get what we want, we're not going anywhere.

That's fine, but there's no one in Tahrir Square today. Strikes are ongoing, which is a good thing, and it's obvious that protesters and everyone who sided with them are anxious not to see any setbacks. I hope there are none! But as IOZ says, we'll know in some years whether this all worked out, so there's no point in fap-fapping about the January 25 revolution on this particular day.

11:00 AM
mp said...

IOZ--You're sounding, all of a sudden, a little too much like Larison.

11:23 AM
¯\(°_0)/¯ said...

Who's the fucking nihilist here?

Oh, IOZ.

11:36 AM
Brian M said...

I have to keep asking the question" What is this "The People" we keep hearing about? Ther are 80 million Egyptians. Is there sucha thing as THE people? What does that mean?

Just like over on Stop Me Before I Vote Again, some poster opined that "the working class needs to get together on an international basis and yadda yadda yadda.
\
Yeah...and a flying pony needs to shit rainbows into my bank account so I can retire early.

11:43 AM
Anonymous said...

In my cynical view of history, the celebrated "people power" tactic of protesting in the city square hasn't been very effective at deposing despotic leaders except when there are other more powerful, and often less visible, forces at work. After the dust settles, and "the people" invariably wind up getting screwed, it's usually because the actual forces behind the revolution get what they wanted, not "the people." All of which leads me to wonder, why did Mubarak really leave office so easily, and whose interests are really behind it? If we could answer that, then we could more accurately predict what happens next. Nevertheless, those Egyptian protesters were some brave mofos, and I hope I'm wrong.

12:43 PM
Anonymous said...

Of all the things IOZ has written, this seems to be one of the absolute least objectionable things ever, one you can take home to meet the folks. Save the real cheering for when the military dictatorship lifts martial law. What the fuck is there to argue about with that? Fucksakes, some of yinz are weird.

12:50 PM
Ethan said...

I just mostly want to know who it is IOZ is responding to that's doing anything different, and what's wrong with cheering more than once.

12:51 PM
Anonymous said...

Ethan: the 'nonviolent activist' community in the US, for one, is exploiting the shit out of this as a victory for nonviolent protest as the one true tactic to conquer tyranny, prematurely declaring a victory for democracy. That may end up being the case, but nobody really knows yet. The whole situation still hangs in the balance, and Egypt could still end up trading one form of abusive tyranny for another, as happens so often.

1:06 PM
demize! said...

All those battles between pro Mubarak thugs, and the protestors, the burning of state offices are a model for American non violent action. Liberals love non violence, it elevates their cowardice into a virtue as I've said before.

1:47 PM
Paul Alexander said...

Seems to me the state is still in existence. Whoever takes control will not want to relinquish power should the people discover that the new boss is too similar to the old boss. I think it's cool that we were able to catch a glimpse of how weak and bumbling the supposedly powerful really are, how their powers aren't all encompassing and how easily they fold in the face of actual resistance. But in the end, history says that those living in the land called Egypt will end up with essentially the same system but with a new paint job. And if that's the case, it does not mean that the 'revolution' failed, just that in all honesty this is the best we can hope for in our life. Things are the way they are not because there's something 'wrong' but because this is how homo sapiens actually are. Try the pudding, there's proof in it.

1:58 PM
Anonymous said...

I think Ethan's point is more along the lines of: The biggest party in the world is going on right now, for legitimate reasons; so why act as though you aren't invited?

2:16 PM
JRB said...

Me, above (2:16).

I wanted to add that I am personally very ashamed to admit that I have not got drunk yet.

2:18 PM
Charles F. Oxtrot said...

But in the end, history says....

Fuckin A! History is a person who thinks and feels, and opines for public consumption!

3:57 PM
Ethan said...

JRB, yeah.

4:56 PM
Anonymous said...

@BrianM

If you can't see in Egypt the real-ness of a broad social movement (aka "the people") moving toward specific goals you are really a mulish ideologue for atomized individualism. Whether the process can be institutionalized or routinized in a "system of government" is another question; whether America's political organization promotes that kind of common consciousness is more dubious still. But three million people deliberately showing themselves together in public all over the Nile watershed as a means of asserting common objectives shows very clearly that "a people" is not imaginary. The incarnation of groups is a basic feature of primate social behavior and watching it in action on the scale we saw in Tahrir Square is rather awe inspiring.

5:31 PM
Charles F. Oxtrot said...

signs of continued momentum:

http://stadtguerillero.tumblr.com/post/3297915570/140211g

5:38 PM
NutellaonToast said...

"Liberals love non violence, it elevates their cowardice into a virtue as I've said before."

Whereas, you humbly take on the virtue of believing that killing is good? No, really, please, stop being so modest and take some credit for endorsing murder.

12:07 AM
Brian M said...

Anonymous:

Sure. Broad social movements are great. But even broad mass social movements are comprised of the minority of people who can or are able or choose to participate. When that movement begins to make decisions which result in violence, I become more skeptical. "The People" support the campaign in Uganda to hunt down and murder gays. I'm sure the "parasite landlords" in Cultural Revolutionary China were not pleased to see "the people" united (and their families murdered). I'm not saying that happened in Egypt or what happened there is in any way bad. I'm just skeptical of broad references to such a thing as "The People". A mob is a mob...and not necessarily moral or good. Sometimes mob action becomes mob violence which can be a bad thing.

I am not taking the side of Mubarak...not saying the revolution is a failure...nothing like that. I'm just agreeing with Ioz here.

7:41 PM
Brian M said...

Plus...beyond removing Mubarak...what are these specific policy goals which have been promoted here? "Give us more jobs" "Justice" "Democracy" All well and good...all worthy goals in a broad sense. Specific policy goals which recognize the realities of the Egyptian economy and society...I'm not as sure.

7:43 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)