Egypt's Future: How to Build a Free Nation (Part II)

by Dr Sam Holliday

Continued from Part I

United States Misconceptions since 1945
Before offering a conceptual framework for a new Egypt it is necessary to comment on some of the misconceptions, which have dominated the thinking in the foreign policy establishment of the United States since 1945.

Those identifying with a nation must be responsible for what happens to their nation. Others can assist, but the leadership, dedication, vision, and energy must come from within.

There are several critical differences between building a nation and the creation of a state, or the expansion of an empire, or the formation of a federation.

- A state is based on coercion--by either force or law--and administration.

- Expanding an empire i.e. creating hegemony, requires a desire to dominate, superiority of armed forces that control territory, and ruthlessness.

- A federation requires agreement among its parts.

- A confederation is a state with considerable decentralization of authority to smaller self-governing units.

From these, Egyptians must determine the form of governance of the new Egypt. At the heart of the new Egypt will be the creation and maintenance of a common sense of identity from which behavior will be self regulated, and coercion will only be required against criminals and insurgents.

Attempting to persuade rival groups, prepared to use force to eliminate each other, to form a coalition government is not wise. This should not be attempted in Egypt. It is naive to treat factions, each of whom demand control of an all powerful centralized government, as parties in a system of parliamentary government based on checks and balances.

This was the error the United States made from 1945 to 1947 in its policy toward China. The United States made the same error in Vietnam, the Middle East, Bosnia, Kosovo, Iraq and Afghanistan—and many other places. Obsession with (1) authority of the central government, (2) “rule of law” to replace custom and tradition, and (3) “democracy” defined as universal suffrage and elections, have caused this same error to be repeated again and again since 1945.

Ideological tunnel vision of American policy makers, who wanted others to have the benefits of American democracy and economic system, have often squandered billions of dollars and produced meager results.

Economic development of the kind practiced by the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (World Bank), often hinders more than it contributes. It has left a trail of destruction and poverty. It has propped up corrupt and chaotic governments. Many of the dams and highways it has financed have damaged the environment and destroyed social patterns of cooperation. It has contributed to the debt of many of the poorest countries.

Economic development has too often been determined by desires of central governments in their attempts to increase the state’s power. This view of economic development needs to be replaced with economic change to provide a better life for the people of Egypt.

Economic development in Egypt is essential; however, it should not focus on centrally controlled projects financed by an external source. There should be primary economic development, controlled at the local level, which provides the basic necessities of food, water, and shelter. There should be secondary economic development that provides the education and training so that Egypt can take advantage of technologic changes in production, distribution, financing, and marketing so as to benefit from an integrated worldwide capitalistic economic system.

The creation of a nation is a long--several generations at least--process; the maintenance of a nation is a never-ending process. This is at odds with the American desire for a quick fix. Today there are many examples of how long it takes to build a nation, even under favorable conditions. Spain after 500 years is still trying to absorb the Basques and the Catalans. After 300 years as the British Isles, Ireland broke away in 1922; both Wales and Scotland still have separatist movements.

Although some countries in South America and Asia seem to have developed national identities, it is difficult to find any true nation in Africa. Will Canada breakup? After extreme efforts in Germany and Italy to build nations around common languages, the primary identification of many Germans and Italians remain with something other than their nation-state.

Both building and preventing the decline of a nation is an art requiring the balancing of many factors. It is not something that can be done quickly or by following a specific recipe, and foreigners certainly cannot do it. However, a realistic conceptual framework of nationbuilding can be a useful tool for Egyptians as they tackle the difficult task of building a new Egypt.

A Conceptual Framework for a New Egypt
Egyptians should pay continual attention to four interrelated tasks:

• Achieve Security
• Provide effective local authority
• Organize and motivate
• Satisfy aspirations

Achieving a security shield is the first task since it is a prerequisite for the other three tasks. However, security cannot be seen as an end in itself. It is merely a means to the end of building a new Egypt. Also, if the focus was primarily on the creation of an Egyptian state, actions to establish centralized control by the police and the Army might be carried to the extreme--such actions would actually hinder identity with the Egyptian nation since they would not produce a self-regulating equilibrium.

Security is achieved when the various levels of government have a monopoly on the use of force, and no group within Egyptian territory is willing to use force to achieve political ends. In the new Egypt internal security will primarily be the responsibility of the police of the districts, villages, and neighborhoods; however, these police must be integrated into an alliance coordinated by the central government in Cairo. In addition, the central government would have the Army to protect Egypt’s interests and to ensure stability within Egypt.

Any group committed to the use of force to weaken or overthrow the established government must be neutralized. For Egypt this would mean insurgents of either the left (neo-Marxists) or the right (Islamists). First of all, this requires an effective intelligence system that will allow rapid response to any attempt at intimidation by any insurgent group, or payment to it.

When terrorism becomes a tool, a capability greater than that appropriate for policing ordinary crime must be added. This will usually require some temporary limitations on civil rights and the legal system. Finally, if insurgents gain control of a part of Egypt’s territory, control must be regained, using both the police and the Army, and the leaders of the insurgent group must be either killed or confined.

A second task for the new Egypt is to provide effective local authority. Each individual lives in a concrete, human, face-to-face world of clear and specific events and situations. Aspirations and an unseen environment may shape spiritual and material life of an individual, but he knows through what he sees, hears, smells and feels. This task provides local leadership.

Leadership which is: alert for signs of problems, inequalities and injustices; able to use initiative and flexibility to win loyalty and produce results; capable of countering acts of intimidation, violence, and destruction; able to see that everyone can earn a decent living; able to accomplish primary economic development; loyal to the established institutions; capable of educating each individual with values which blend freedom, ambition, duty and responsibility as well as the skills needed for economic improvement.

The third task of the new Egypt is to organize and motivate the people. The new Egyptian nation will be no more than Egyptian citizens welded together by a common destiny that binds into an active whole, yesterday, today and tomorrow. This task creates and maintains shared values, attitudes, habits and goals which shape the institutions through which a nation lives and grows: patterns of cooperation and conflict; the fabric of sanctioned relationship; the unseen lines of magnetic strength which link, join and confine; the elusive cultural environment. This task creates kinship and facilitates both primary and secondary economic development.

The fourth task of the new Egypt is to satisfy aspirations of Egyptian citizens. The fuel of progress is the never-ending attempt to satisfy aspirations. Economic development is a critical part of satisfying aspirations, but it must be joined with belief.

At this time Islam provides the strongest belief system in Egypt, but the Islamists would return Egypt to the 4th century. The belief of modern Muslims is not strong enough to effectively challenge the Islamists—nor is that of any other religion. Therefore, the only belief system that can provide a stronger horse than Islam is Egyptian nationalism and patriotism. The Egyptian military are well suited to use this belief system to neutralize the Islamists.

Aspirations can unite people in common effort; yet, aspirations can set one against another, preventing progress. Satisfying aspirations is an elusive, two faced task. Sole concern with satisfying aspirations can only result in turmoil, frustration and bitterness; as past aspirations are approached new and more demanding ones are invented.

This task means that Egypt must have its own, unique, ideology. Egypt must reject the ideologies of the Islamists and the neo-Marxists, since both would enslave Egyptians to the control of non-Egyptians. However, this task, just like the first task of achieving a security shield, must not be carried to an extreme.

If this conceptual framework is to be useful for the new Egypt, actions to accomplish these four tasks must be interrelated, and the building and maintenance of the new Egyptian nation must be seen as a never-ending process.

Conclusions
Egyptians need to remember the meaning of the Sacred Red, White, and Black of their flag. They must be prepared to fight against the ideologies of the neo-Marxists and Islamists. Americans cannot do any of this for the Egyptians, but they must understand and support Egyptians as they do about accomplishing the four tasks of building a new Egypt.

Copyright © 201 Armiger Cromwell Center, Atlanta, GA 30319.

Permission is granted to forward this article by e-mail to friends or colleagues on a fair use basis. For reprint permission, contact Armiger Cromwell Center at armigercc@comcast.net

For more essays and articles published by Dr Sam Holliday on Politeia  please refer to our file on Articles,  "The Armiger Cromwell Center"

Related

- "Who is a Patriot"
- "The Mandate of Heaven" (on authority and sovereignty)

Egypt's Future: How to Build a Free Nation (Part I)

by Dr Sam Holliday

On the night of 10-11 February 2011 the Egyptian military staged a bloodless coup to remove President Hosni Mubarak, following two weeks of turmoil and 19 hours of chaos. They promised to carry out the will of the Egyptian people. However, there is no way of knowing who will emerge to lead Egypt, or what the role of the military will be in the long run. For now the regime retains its power, for the aims of the younger military officers of the regime were the same as the crowds, i.e. to get rid of Mubarak and the patriarchs. The regime is a complex centered on the military but includes many civilians in the business and the government bureaucracies.

Since there is no consensus on Egypt’s future, the coming months and years will be a struggle between competing visions. Will it become a real revolution, or will the regime hold its control? This will be determined by the youth. What should be the policy of the United States during this move to a new Egypt—and a new Middle East?

FForemost should be the realization that the new Egypt is the responsibility of Egyptians, not Americans. Egyptians must establish a climate of order and satisfaction, they must rebuild Egypt’s economy, and Egyptians must determine a form of governance based on their own customs and traditions.

Also, the United States must not repeat the errors made, by the foreign policy establishment, around the world since 1945.

U.S. Foreign Policy Regarding Egypt
In relations with Egypt, the United States should do what it can to advance Sacred Red, White, and Blue/Black—the colors in the American and Egyptian flags.
Sacred Red symbolizes the courage, practicality, and duty of Moses, Saint Paul, Oliver Cromwell and George Washington.
White symbolizes the compassion, purity, and honor of Jesus, Buddha, and John Adams.
Blue/Black symbolizes the unity, shared identity, and administrative skill of the Egyptian Pharaohs’ in linking humans with the divine, of Genghis Khan’s “blue sky”, and of America’s founders dreams.

This Red, White and Blue/Black must be integrated into a whole through checks and balances of principles, ideals, individuals, factions, and institutions. The outcome should be the decentralization of power to achieve governance of, by and for the people, rather than the centralization of power in the hands of an elite in accordance with the Hegelian dialectic. Also the United States should do what it can to counter the threats of the socialist collectivism (Secular Red) and the social-political ideology of Islam (Green).

The waving of the Red, White, and Blue/Black flags of the United States and Egypt should be constant reminders that Americans and Egyptians are both in an existential struggle with true believers of both the right (Islamists) and the left (Neo-Marxists). The Egyptian youth were revolting against the paternalistic, unaccountable authority that as prevailed across the Middle East for thousands of years. It is essential to remember that free individuals, making judgments based on their inner compass, are hated by both the Islamists and the Neo-Marxists; some may consider them political opposites, yet they share the Hegelian view that authoritarian control, by true believers, of a collective is the best form of governance.

Democracy is a noble goal; however, since the word “democracy” has so many different meanings, it can be fool’s gold.

For Egypt U.S. foreign policy should seek: (1) a version of democracy which allows Egyptian citizens to determine their own destiny, (2) a constitution which maintains stability and economic development, (3) the recognition of how technology has changed communication, and (4) citizenship which is a privilege for those who give primacy to the interests of Egypt.

In Egypt the aim should be individual Egyptian citizens with the free will to determine their own destiny; the aim should not be equality of outcomes among individuals or factions.

The goal should be equality before God, equality before the law, and equality of opportunity; the goal should not be so called social justice, which takes from the haves and gives to the have-nots. There should be civil rights, given to individuals by God, which protect life, freedom, and property as individuals pursue happiness as determined by Egyptians—not human rights as determined by others.

There should be processes and procedures to ensure long-term governance of, by and for the Egyptian citizens--not processes, procedures and elections to insure compliance with specific written documents. “One man, one vote, one time” must be prevented. A future collective totalitarian state—of either the left (socialistic) or of the right (Islamic) must be avoided.

Consensus on a social contract (expressed in customs and traditions and also in a written constitution) is necessary, but not sufficient. Respect for the rule of law, political parties to champion competing points of view, freedom of speech, freedom of political expression, and freedom of assembly, and freedom of association are all needed to insure the Secular Authority of the state.

In addition there must also be primary economic development to ensure that there is adequate food, water and shelter and that the poorest aspire for a better life. Also there must the secondary economic development so that Egyptians think they are the economic equals of their peers and can see themselves as a worthy descendents of their 7,000 year history. Yet such worldly accomplishments must be in equilibrium with Sacred Authority, i.e. a common identity and shared principles and ideas which provide an inner compass to guide judgments between right and wrong, good and bad.

In the past when communication and transportation were more restricted national identity was based on cultural, ethnic, racial, or religious convictions. However, the global village of today and tomorrow make this impractical. Any future Egyptian nation must be based on shared principles, ideals and beliefs. This makes it necessary to exclude those individuals, groups, and parties who primarily identity with belief in a collective of either the left (neo-Marxists) or the right (Islamists)—as well as those who give their primarily allegiance to another state or to world governance.

Therefore, Egyptian citizenship must become a privilege to be earned, not a right of residency that allows master manipulators to control others. Universal human rights can remain an ideal, but the civil rights of Egypt must govern the behavior of Egyptians. Only those who have pledged their loyalty to, and demonstrated their patriotism for, Egypt should be allowed to participate in the struggles to determine Egypt’s future.

What the United States has Done Since 1945
Since 1945, inept actions by the United States in many countries has squandered billions of dollars, contributed to the deaths of millions, created poverty, and caused the loss of many opportunities. Most of this was done with the best of intentions and humanitarian instincts. Often these were the consequences of unquestioned preconceptions regarding how to build a state or nation. Such preconceptions have dominated the thinking of Americans, in and out of government, who have shaped U.S. foreign policy.

Will this be admitted? Certainly not. Can this be proven? Probably not. Most likely, articles and studies will continue to debate what happened, and why, with the "history" presented determined by the preconceptions of the authors.

In the past many have questioned the appropriateness of the United States being involved in building states and nations around the world. And today this debate continues. During such debates regarding Egypt it is essential that the difference between building a state and building a nation be understood.

State building is the creation and maintenance of legitimate authority, a legal system, and administrative capability to govern territory. Nationbuilding is the creation and maintenance of a sense of common identity among a people. Also it is important to recognize the reasons for the successes and failures made in the name of “nation-building”.

Obviously there have been successes since 1945. Changes in Western Europe, Japan, Korea, Taiwan, Singapore and even parts of Eastern Europe have been more positive than negative. Yet such progress has primarily been the result of efforts by the people of those countries, and circumstances unique to them. Nevertheless, preconceptions about building states and nations have hindered improvement in much of the world since 1945.

The Preconceptions
Unquestioned preconceptions about the creation and decline of nations were forged during World War II. The horrors of that war were blamed on nationalism and the nation-state. This overlooked the fact that paranoia and unspeakable crimes are to be found throughout history. The horrors committed by tribes, sects, and empires probably did affect fewer people, but they were no less repulsive.

Human beings need beliefs that offer a sense of order, that overcome the fears of an arbitrary environment, that give people some hope of control over random events. Group identity and religion have always been the two main sources of such belief systems. Moreover, human progress has depended on how group identities (be they family, tribe, sect, class, religion, or nation) relate to political structures having a monopoly on the use of force.

Human progress accelerated when the nation-state became the focus of personal loyalties, social order, political institutions, and economic coordination, because it was able to combine the cohesiveness of the nation with the legal authority and administrative capability of the state. However, with this progress came the excesses of integral (or totalitarian) nationalism.

Since World War II three contending ideologies (all called democratic) have been offered as replacements for nationalism: capitalism based on merit, communism based on equality of outcomes, and internationalism based on universal human rights. Yet none of the three have been able to create a sense of identity, vigor, innovation, and climate of order to equal that created by nation-states.

None have provided the new political form to replace the nation-state. This suggests that as a political structure the nation-state is superior to a multicultural state, or a coercion based state. It also suggests that any new world order must be of small nation-states rather than the centralization of power in world governance.

The challenge is achieve common identity among Egyptians yet to prevent the excesses and extremes, which have at times been associated with integral nationalism. Therefore, there is a need for a conceptual framework for building an Egyptian nation, which will be held together by sovereign nationalism—not by the integral nationalism of Egypt’s past statism.

Integral nationalism is intolerant and ethnocentric. Integral nationalism is linked to totalitarianism, and demands the highest loyalty be to the state in accordance with the views of Hegel. Integral nationalism seeks cultural and religious uniformity, plus institutional and economic unity. It tends to arise from religious or utopian beliefs, internal economic and political difficulties, or historical rivalries. The goal of integral nationalism is uniformity of purpose, appearance, beliefs, attitudes, and prejudices. It is linked to the statism, which many Islamic countries took from Western culture during the 19th and 20th centuries.

Sovereign nationalism seeks the ideals expressed in American Declaration of Independence. Sovereign nationalism is an expression of the human desire for freedom and self-government. It places an emphasis on popular sovereignty, a constitution, decentralization, and civil rights—it is legitimized by a social contract between a people and their state. Sovereign nationalism is often a melting pot resulting in E Pluribus Unum (of many, one). It is sovereign nationalism that offers hope for the Egypt—and the 21st century. It can provide peace, security, self-government, and stability by creating loyalties, emotional ties, and a common sense of identity among citizens.

In Part II

United States Misconceptions since 1945

Before offering a conceptual framework for a new Egypt it is necessary to comment on some of the misconceptions, which have dominated the thinking in the foreign policy establishment of the United States since 1945. Those identifying with a nation must be responsible for what happens to their nation. Others can assist, but the leadership, dedication, vision, and energy must come from within. (...)

Copyright © 201 Armiger Cromwell Center, Atlanta, GA 30319.

Permission is granted to forward this article by e-mail to friends or colleagues on a fair use basis. For reprint permission, contact Armiger Cromwell Center at armigercc@comcast.net

For more essays and articles published by Dr Sam Holliday on Politeia  please refer to our file on Articles,  "The Armiger Cromwell Center"

Related

- "Who is a Patriot"
- "The Mandate of Heaven" (on authority and sovereignty)

Egypt Fallen to the Unholy Alliance (updated)

Updates Feb. 15, 2011

- UPI: "Muslim Brotherhood steps into politics"
- Associated Content: "Google Egypt: Ghonim Not the Only Tie to Protests"
- Pundicity: "Pyramid Scheme", by Clifford May

It's no secret to The New York Times. They are very open and upfront about it. But then again, the paper doesn't think a close cooperation between the Left and Islamists is any problem.

Cartoon by Mike Lester

Except if Glenn Beck is devoting a program to it. Then Media Matters steps in to deny what anyone with a pair of eyes can see for himself.

Watch the Glenn Beck program after Pres. Mubarak stepped down. Oh, and get this:

"they aspire to a Western-style constitutional democracy where civic institutions are stronger than individuals" ... 

... that would be a socialist collective! Does that sound to you like a Jeffersonian democracy based on individual rights? They have no idea what they're talking about! These kids are clueless! The NYT again (our emphasis):

In the process many have formed some unusual bonds that reflect the singularly non-ideological character of the Egyptian youth revolt, which encompasses liberals, socialists and members of the Muslim Brotherhood. 

“I like the Brotherhood most, and they like me,” said Sally Moore, a 32-year-old psychiatrist, a Coptic Christian and an avowed leftist and feminist of mixed Irish-Egyptian roots. (...) Islam Lotfi, a lawyer who is a leader of the Muslim Brotherhood Youth, said his group used to enlist others from the tiny leftist parties to stand with them in calling for civil liberties, to make their cause seem more universal. Many are now allies in the revolt (...)

So that's the MO. You throw around a few Western sounding labels about 'democracy', 'freedom' and 'diversity', pretending cooptation towards a common cause and no one is asking questions. One Egyptian president - Anwar Sadat - was murdered by that bunch!

In the last couple of weeks the media have been jumping through hoops to picture the Muslim Brotherhood a respectable organisation in the eyes of the world.

A few enigmas that have sprung up over the last few weeks have been cleared up. Other mysteries have taken their place. Some are exceedingly disturbing!

Cartoon by Chip Bok

James Clapper, Director of National Intelligence sat in front of a House Intelligence Committee this week and asserted publicly that the Muslim Brotherhood was a “largely secular” organization.

The term “Muslim Brotherhood” ... is an umbrella term for a variety of movements, in the case of Egypt, a very heterogeneous group, largely secular, which has eschewed violence and has decried Al Qaeda as a perversion of Islam.

That would be the same Clapper who was uninformed about what was the great news on that particular day. Either the US 'intelligence community' has suffered a collective stroke, or they are exceedingly bad actors. I can't go as yet with Alex Jones' latest conspiracy theory, that it is in fact the CIA's invisible hand that's behind this cascade of uprisings.

On the other hand the Obama administration was seen flat-footed with Egypt's uprising. That perception was covered by the pretense that they had been supporting pro democracy groups all along! But that would be Bush's evil Neocons.

Obama's foreign policy was primarily framed by the narrative of 'thou shalt not foist Western style, liberal democracy on others'. Others may [sarc on] like their regimes slightly tyrannical. Who are we to judge?! There isn't just one true democracy. There are as many forms of democracy as there are people! [sarc off]. This has prompted the administration to cut funding as soon as it had changed the drapes in the Oval Office.

The information black hole sparked the institution a year ago of the bi-partisan Working Group on Egypt. It informed and warned the White House publicly and repeatedly, that Egypt was approaching a turning point and that the status quo was untenable. The first sentence of its opening statement read: "Egypt is at a critical turning point."

It should come as no surprise that the stooge for the unholy alliance is the 'social justice' loving former head of the IAEA, Mohammed ElBaradei. The safety of the world has been in this man's hands for years, during which he's been whitewashing and covering up the Iranian nuke program.

It is also no coincidence that both George Soros and ElBaradei both sat on the Board of Trustees of the International Crisis Group, one of Soros' agitation groups. His fingerprint is all over this revolt, as we've seen in "The Nature of the Revolution Is Socialist, Stupid!"

Here's how these misguided kids negotiate with the Muslims Brotherhood!

"On the question of alcohol — forbidden by Islam — he suggested that drinking was a private matter but that perhaps it should be forbidden in public."

They seriously believe the Brotherhood is going to stand for that! These people are going to be crushed. On the question whether the Left or the Islamists will prevail, my money is firmly on the Brotherhood.

As to what will be the model for this 'democratic' society? One Egyptian jacobin is with Tareq Ramadam on that: well, it's Turkey of course. As it happens that secular country, since the Islamists came to power, has been slowly sinking into an abyss, at the bottom of which is Islamofascist Iran! It was Turkey that aided and abetted the Gaza (r)aid flotilla for crying out loud!

Read in this article in Wall Street Journal, "The Secret Rally That Sparked an Uprising" how the revolt was pulled of, with a little help from a little worm, Google Inc. executive, Wael Ghonim.

Cartoon by Michael Ramirez

Well, will wonders never cease? And some are thinking the Left is against military dictatorships. But that should read of course: the Left is against any military junta, other than those they believe can be exploited to their advantage. Long live the Egyptian junta!

The same is true of Obama's neutrality and strict non-interference doctrine: that would be applicable to Iran where the lines of parley must remain open at all times. The Green movement be damned! But as far as Egypt is concerned, this is a historic moment for the Egyptian youth.

Related

- Politeia: "The Nature of the Revolution Is Socialist, Stupid!"

- The Graph: "The Socialist Roots Of The Egyptian Protests", by Brooks Bayne

- Africa Workers Organizer: "The Egyptian revolution has started" (Scribd doc) (via Uruknet)

- USA Survival: "U.S.-based Marxists Subvert Friendly Regimes and Support Foreign Terrorist Organizations" (PDF)

- New Zeal: "Revolution in Egypt - Out of the Frying Pan into the Fire"

- NoisyRoom: "Of Philanthropists and Monsters - Rockin' the Casbah", by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton (H/T Trevor Loudon"

Related dossiers

- "The Economy and Monetary file"
- "The Middle East Project"
- "The Levant Intricate Intrigues"

Egypt: the Revolution Has It Backward

For the latest also check our links on Politeia Articles: "The Middle East Project" >>>

That regime change and elections aren't the answer in the Muslim world, has been made plain in the Gaza Strip, where the population voted in an Islamofascist regime, thus effectively killing the state of democracy faster than you can say Hamas.

The problem is that  for democracy to take hold, much more is required than just a ballot box and a pot of purple ink. Freedom is an inherent, universal value, but it requires a civil society and above all, respect for individual rights to take root. A certain stage of social development is needed as well as a mindset that has separated itself from the tribal collective.

The post "A Paradox of Values" on Hoosier Access by Brian Sikma make this plain:

(...) While all parties seem to agree that Mubarak must go, there is very little indication that these popular protests have as their goal the establishment of a Western-style democratic state. The opposition groups have attempted to use the language of freedom to build international support for their cause, but a recent piece in the Washington Examiner takes a look at some polling done in Egypt on popular views regarding the role of religion in society.

In the Middle-East with its strong Islamic culture, democracy as traditionally understood by the Western mind is frequently tempered by strongly held local beliefs about the importance and centrality of religion and its role in society and government. While the West draws its understanding of freedom from Judeo-Christian values, those religions believe that ultimately every human being is responsible to God for his or her actions and beliefs. Aberrations from this point have produced significant amounts of chaos and tragedy. (...) >>>

The West - particularly the clueless crypto Left with their 'democracy' fetish - must let go of their naive revolutionary romanticism when it comes to the Middle East. This is the wrong sequence of events. Civil societies must be built, individuals must emancipate and free themselves from the constraints of the tribal collective that knows no distinction from matters sacred and secular.

I hesitate to state the separation of Mosque and State, because that is often interpreted as French Laicite, or the banning of all things religious from the public domain. But it's originally a negative freedom for the state not to meddle in what is considered the realm of the Church. But what is required here is a mental dichotomy of moral and secular matters, something that is hard enough in the free West with Leftists constantly writing their particular morality into secular law.

Alexis De Tocqueville has written a worthy tome on the concept of true Liberty in 1835 and how it took root in the United States.

Notwithstanding, Europe and in its wake the rest of the world, stubbornly keep following the French route, which is rooted in Rousseau's faulty concept of the collective State. It doesn't lead to Liberty, but to subordination to a collective of one terrifying form or other: ethnic nationalist, theocratic, Socialist or fascist.

This is what is in the making in the heart of secular Arabia, Egypt and in the dominos that are falling in the wake of Tunisia's Socialist Revolution. The call for democracy and freedom is soon turning into a hate fest against the perceived outside enemies, Israel and the US, ironically the very sources of true freedom and democracy!

In Iran the 1979 revolution was started by far Left Socialists and communists, only to be hijacked at a later stage by Islamists. They have beaten the Left at their own game of using stooges to do their dirty work!

Obama has already lost Egypt. He has been reaching out to Islamist organizations, which in Cold War terms is like parley with the KGB and thinking the Polit Bureau will stay out of it. This is rather insidious, given that the aim of the Muslim Brotherhood is the destruction of Western civilization from within.

Much hay has been made of the Pew Surveys (PDF) in the Islamic world as to their loyalty to Islamist causes and radical organizations. The appalling figures speak for themselves and support this shocking analysis that the hive minds aren't ready for any form of democracy in the Middle East. They remain faithfully loyal to the collective, thus spurning any form of individual responsibility. This is not the mature mindset required for a healthy liberal democracy.

Civil order, the rule of law and emancipation come first. Once that has taken hold, the ballot box follows naturally.

Updates

• Pat Dollard has made a compilation of the battles today on Egypt's streets.

• Abbas Milani is the director of Iranian Studies at Stanford University and a co-director of the Iran Democracy Project at the Hoover Institution. His new book The Shah was published a few weeks ago by Palgrave MacMillan. Michael J. Totten sat down with him in his office at the Hoover Institution to talk about what’s happening right now in Egypt -
  

PJM: "The Iranian Revolution Echoes in Egypt", by Michael J. Totten

• “Be forewarned: The writer of this blog is an extremely cynical, snarky, pro-US, secular, libertarian, disgruntled sandmonkey”. His latest news live from Cairo ... Michael J. Totten: Sandmonkey arrested and beaten, his site under attack ... report from sandmonkey what happened yesterday on CBS

The man who wrote those words – the witty and courageous Egyptian blogger “Sandmonkey” – is currently in hiding in his native city of Cairo, moving from one friend’s apartment to another, as supporters of Hosni Mubarak pursue him and other democracy demonstrators.

PJM: "Cairo Exclusive: Roger L. Simon’s Interview with ‘Sandmonkey’"

Related

- Jerusalem Post: "Our World: Clueless in Washington", by Caroline Glick
- American Power Blog: "Analytical Realism: Political Stability in Egypt is Cardinal Israeli Interest"

Earlier on this subject

- "Revolution on Motion" (I)
- "Postmodern Foreign Policy is Dead, Bring Back the Neocons!" (II)
- "The Nature of the Revolution Is Socialist, Stupid!" (III)

Related dossiers

- "The Economy and Monetary file"
- "The Middle East Project"
- "The Levant Intricate Intrigues"

The Nature of the Revolution Is Socialist, Stupid!

For the latest check our links on Politeia Articles: "The Middle East Project" >>>

I told you so! "The Revolution Has Begun!" While we are all watching the Islamist component of the revolution in Tunesia and Egypt, the root of the uprising remains undeclared and unnoticed: it's International Socialism, stupid! (And yes, Wikileaks and SoroS are in it, too...) (Hat Tip: Libertarier_Def)

- An 'authentic', 'grassroots' pamphlet translated by The Atlantic,
high quality art work, first rate graphics, not exactly work
post-hastily jotted down by a knuckle-dragging Bedoein -

This isn't 'grassroots' or anything spontaneous in any way! It is - as usual - triggered from the top down in a concerted effort. That's not to say the Islamists won't be taking hold of the reigns at a later stage. After all, that's precisely what happened in 1979 in the Iranian Revolution.

Trevor Loudon of New Zeal traces it back to a bloggers outfit called Wasla, which is published by the Arabic Network for Human Rights Information and financially supported by the Open Society Institute, created by none other than George Soros; Brooks Bayne ends up with the same result, through Soros-funded GlobalVoices.

What have we got so far? A Postmodern man-child in the White House, essentially a mental baby with a razor, who is in way over his head! Wikileaks has been creating an atmosphere of unreliability and failure of the world's leaders at large. An economic and monetary crisis which may, or may not have been triggered within the system (see the entry on this dossier on Sept. 19, 2010 entitled "On the September 2008 money vortex").

Iran is plotting to take over swaths of the Middle East through their proxies in Syria, Lebanon (which is now ruled by Hezbollah), Turkey, and Hamas in the Gaza Strip. The Islamic uprising against 'imperialism' is egged on by the Qatari Shiite news outlet, Al Jazeera (since ousted from Egypt). On the other hand, when the Islamofascist regime isn't hanging innocent house wives, it might want to do the world a favor by comitting suicide and pilot the Bushehr reactor, causing a massive nuclear explosion.

Violent protests against austerity measures in Greece, a violent election dispute in Albania, violent student protests in the UK and Netherlands, regime change in Tunesia, rioting in Algeria, Albania, Yemen, Israel (Jaffa), Jordan and an ongoing revolt in the heart of Arabia, Egypt which may set off a string of dominos tumbling all over the Middle East.

It is no coincidence that both George Soros and ElBaradei both sit on the Board of Trustees of the International Crisis Group, one of Soros' agitators. While some see ElBaradei as a strawman for the Muslim Brotherhood and a stooge of the regime in Iran, the Marxist Africa Workers Organization has this self-explanatory piece of undiluted, Socialist paranoia to share:

Mohamed El Baradei is an imperialist puppet (...) He was placed under house arrest briefly to boost his profile as being with ‘the masses’. He has been planted by imperialism to betray the revolution from within. Imperialism has struck a deal with the Muslim Brotherhood to promote ElBaradei as the ‘leader’ of the revolution. The price was of course a stake for the Muslim Brotherhood in the new regime. The Muslim Brotherhood is a highly reactionary organization, with militantant-imperialist rhetoric but who are fundamentally pro-capitalist. (...) 

The immediate task of the revolution is the setting up of soviets, that is, committees of struggle with worker delegates principally (but not limited to) from the textile, gas and oil, hydroelectricity and metal and armamentsfactories, from the large capitalist farms, including delegates from rank and file soldiers, delegates from the unemployed, students and ruined sectors of the lower middle class and poorest peasants (in the agricultural areas). (...) >>>

More vintage Marxist lingo on The Socialist Worker: "Egyptian socialist: 'We can make Mubarak run like Ben Ali'".

How could we have missed it?! Because our bl**dy media are either colluding with the Islamist-Marxist nexus, or they don't know their Democrats from their Socialists (probably both, but the ethics are 'all systems are equally valid, but Socialism can't be as bad as they told us!'). The words Socialism and extreme Left have effectively been expunged from the lexicon. It simply doesn't exist anymore!

Some in Europe think we should all support the efforts for the fledgeling 'Jeffersonian democracy' in Egypt. Well, there's hardly a point in substituting a crypto Socialist dictatorship with yet another hard Islamo-Socialist tyranny!

Watch words: democracy, freedom and justice are code words for Socialism (always have been). This has nothing to do with the Jeffersonian version called Liberty. We now all know what the call for 'change' stands for: fundamental transformation i.e. revolution.

Question: Why are some ludicrously comparing this revolt with the Tea Party? It is an absurd effort to confuse people into accepting the collectivist, malignant revolt for the Jeffersonian version, which is based on individual rights, not collectivism like the present one.

Question: Who is the young dissident who attended a US-sponsored Alliance of Youth Movements summit for activists in New York, while working to keep his identity secret from Egyptian state police?  On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011. The secret document in full. He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph. Commentary by DebkaFile.

Who's behind the Alliance of Youth Movements summit in New York and which members of Congress did the activist meet? George W. Bush was in office in 2008, so that would be the hated Neocon "freedom agenda".

• Update Feb. 15, 2011 - He has surfaced - Accociated Content: "Google Egypt: Ghonim Not the Only Tie to Protests", by Douglas Stewart

The same article is stating that "The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change” for the past three years".

We should all stop egging on this malignant revolt, because we may come to gravely regret it!

P.S. Was just informed that Hosni Mubarak and former Tunisian president Ben Ali who fled to Saudi, are both card carrying members of the Socialist International. So these are Socialists rising up against Socialist dictatorships. What else is new? Surely they'll get it right this time ... Update Feb. 1 Their parties have just been booted from the club: NDP in Egypt (PDF), RDC of Tunisia.

Related

- The Graph: "The Socialist Roots Of The Egyptian Protests", by Brooks Bayne
- Africa Workers Organizer: "The Egyptian revolution has started" (Scribd doc) (via Uruknet)
- USA Survival: "U.S.-based Marxists Subvert Friendly Regimes and Support Foreign Terrorist Organizations" (PDF)
- New Zeal: "Revolution in Egypt - Out of the Frying Pan into the Fire"
- NoisyRoom: "Of Philanthropists and Monsters - Rockin' the Casbah", by Terresa Monroe-Hamilton (H/T Trevor Loudon"
- Politeia: "The Revolution Has Begun"
- Politeia: "Revolution in Motion"

Related dossiers

- "The Economy and Monetary file"
- "The Middle East Project"
- "The Levant Intricate Intrigues"

Postmodern Foreign Policy is Dead, Bring Back the Neocons!

For the latest check our links on Politeia Articles: "The Middle East Project" >>>

The utter hypocrisy on the part of the Postmodern Left is once again in full view!

When George W. Bush was in office, pursuing the Neocon policy of bringing democracy to the Middle East, that was loudly rejected as "liberty by coercion".

In this narrative the people of the Middle East ostensibly [sarc on] like their regimes slightly tyrannical. Who are we to judge?! Our Jeffersonian brand of democracy may not suit all people. There isn't just one true democracy. There are as many forms of democracy as there are people! Democracy may even be overrated, ormaybe it doesn't 'work' anymore [sarc off].

Now that the potentates are falling like pieces on a chess board, it's "America is propping up dictators". Well, actually, the Obama is.

An adept of above 'freedom is slavery' school of thought he's been following the 'thou shalt not meddle' narrative to the letter, reversing the Bush doctrine. Abdicating the proliferation of liberty, Obama has been doing everything in his power to keep communication lines open to the bad guys: Hamas, Hezbollah, the Muslim Brotherhood and the Islamofascist regime in Iran and its proxy Syria.

He's even installed the first US ambassador to Syria in five years. On the other hand, Mubarak hasn't visited the White House in five years, because of the hated Bush's "freedom agenda".

Parley with dictators is the central Pomo foreign policy piece! No violence, no violence, is all the "make peace, not war" generation of leaders can muster. As if anyone cared! They've never heard of Ayn Rand's logical wisdom that the Good has nothing to gain from Evil and Evil has everything to gain from the Good! By talking to these evil doers they've turned into co-conspirators. This is how Evil works. Go ask Faust!

See how many peoples and causes Obama has already thrown "Under the Bus" with his faulty doctrine. US Homeland Security Secretary, Janet "Big Sis" Napolitano and her senior staff have already privately met in Washington, DC, in January of last year with a select group of Muslim, Arab, and Sikh organizations, among which were three organizations directly associated with the Muslim Brotherhood, the roots of Al Qaeda.

Our Leftist journolisters (is there any other kind) are reporting about the Brotherhood in Egypt in terms of the greatest respect and something akin to affection in their tone of voice, as if the Brotherhood was a boys choir! It's infuriating!

The Washington Post has two separate articles today that are highly critical of the Obama's foreign policy. Yeah, out with the Postmodernists and bring back the darned Neocons!

• "George W.Bush was right about freedom in the Arab World", by Elliott Abrams

• "Obama administration could still get it right on Egypt", by Jackson Diehl

While various forms of statism and totalitarianism are on the rise: Neo Socialism in South America, the Chinese commies are arming to the teeth morphing into a giant fascist state, and Iran's proxies are taking over the Middle East, Lebanon - the place of the Ceder Revolution - has fallen to bl**dy Hezbollah.

Meanwhile the O Team is in the throngs of micro-managing school dinners and in the business of destructing jobs through malignant Uberregulation. It can do so, because 'all systems are equally valid'.

So much for Postmodern foreign policy! Before last week its status was 'a geopolitical disaster waiting to happen'; currently the catastrophe is actually unfolding before our very eyes. A year from now we may not have done away with the Islamofascist state of Iran, we may actually have an Arab version of it as well.

ElBaradei is a Kifaya and a Muslim Brotherhood tool and a stooge for Iran. He's a straw-man who can just as easily be toppled as he's stood up. For the moment each and every nut job in the Middle East will be pouring into the country. Egypt for the moment is eerily following the 1979 scenario.

Related

- American Thinker: "Obama, liberals caught 'intellectually unprepared' for Egypt crisis", by Rick Moran
- American Thinker: "Obama and the Ripple Effect", by Leo Rennert
- Politeia: "Revolution in Motion"
- "Leo Strauss and History: The Philosopher as Conspirator", by Claes G. Ryn (PDF) (H/T Multikulbasher)

Related dossiers

- "Middle East Project"
- "The Levant Intricate Intrigues"
- "The Postmodern Presidency"
- "Neototalitarianism"

Revolution in Motion

For the latest check our links on Politeia Articles: "The Middle East Project" >>>

Update

'The Arab Street' is demanding liberty and democracy, but it needs a civil society first (though this is stemming hopeful). Without it, it will be the second coming of the Gaza Strip, where Hamas was voted into power. The Muslim Brotherhood or AlBaradei holding the reigns in Egypt will make a dangerous neighborhood seem an Islamofascist Gaza on steroids.

This just in! Yeah, remember the darned Neocons? Elliott Abrams: "George W.Bush was right about freedom in the Arab World" -

The Telegraph: "Egypt protests: America's secret backing for rebel leaders behind uprising"

The American government secretly backed leading figures behind the Egyptian uprising who have been planning “regime change” for the past three years, The Daily Telegraph has learned. (...) >>>

Who is the young dissident who attended a US-sponsored Alliance of Youth Movements summit for activists in New York?  On his return to Cairo in December 2008, the activist told US diplomats that an alliance of opposition groups had drawn up a plan to overthrow President Hosni Mubarak and install a democratic government in 2011. The secret document in full. He has already been arrested by Egyptian security in connection with the demonstrations and his identity is being protected by The Daily Telegraph. Commentary by DebkaFile.

While we're still trying to figure out if the fascist collective headed by Mubarak will be replaced by an Islamofascist collective of Shiite or Suni making, or a Marxist one, the activist action plan has surfaced.

The Atlantic at this stage has managed to translate a few pages. Keep watching that space, as it's an ongoing project:

• The Atlantic: "Egyptian Activists' Action Plan: Translated"

Egyptian activists have been circulating a kind of primer to Friday's planned protest. We were sent the plan by two separate sources and have decided to publish excerpts here, with translations into English. Over Twitter, we connected with a translator, who translated the document with exceptional speed.

What follows are side-by-side translations of nine pages from the 26-page pamphlet. They were translated over the last hour and pasted up in Photoshop to give you an idea of what's in the protest plan. While the plan itself contains specifics about what protesters might do, these excerpts show how one might equip oneself for clashes with riot police. (...) >>>

The British Guardian has a brief synopsis:

• The Guardian: "Egypt protest leaflets distributed in Cairo give blueprint for mass action"

Egyptians have been urged to come out after Friday prayers tomorrow and demand the overthrow of Hosni Mubarak's government, along with freedom, justice and a democratic regime.

Anonymous leaflets circulating in Cairo also provide practical and tactical advice for mass demonstrations, confronting riot police, and besieging and taking control of government offices.

Signed "long live Egypt", the slickly produced 26-page document calls on demonstrators to begin with peaceful protests, carrying roses but no banners, and march on official buildings while persuading policemen and soldiers to join their ranks.

The leaflet ask recipients to redistribute it by email and photocopy, but not to use social media such as Facebook and Twitter, which are being monitored by the security forces. (...) >>>

The hooligans of Wikileaks fanning the flames (they would, of course):

• Forbes: "Amid Digital Blackout, Anonymous Mass-Faxes WikiLeaks Cables To Egypt", by Andy Greenberg

Egypt has dropped a digital iron curtain over its Internet. So WikiLeaks’ fans are using an analog tool to smuggle the secret-spilling site’s latest scandals into the country: fax machines.

On Friday afternoon, the loose hacker group Anonymous began a campaign to fax thousands of copies of WikiLeaks’ latest missives–a series of State Department cables revealing human rights abuses under Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak and tacit U.S. backing for his administration–to Egyptian numbers.

Since Thursday night, Egypt has blocked its four largest Internet service providers, Link Egypt, Vodafone/Raya, Telecom Egypt, and Etisalat Misr. But landlines remain connected–and so, Anonymous believes, do landline-connected fax machines. “We stand up for the little guy as well as fighting the government,” one source within Anonymous writes to me. “We believe the people need to see the truth, which is why we’re faxing locations in Egypt (especially schools) with copies of a relevant WikiLeaks cable; due to the majority of Egyptian Internet being down, the public cannot access this vital information.”

On a crowdsourced document that the group uses for planning, members listed fax numbers of half a dozen Egyptian schools as their first targets. “The idea is to distribute the information to students, who can then share it with others,” says another source within Anonymous. “Right now they need to know that the police cannot be trusted and the wikileaks cables are just more proof of that." (...) >>>

Keep an eye on how the Egyptians are bypassing the Internet black out, reads a caveat emanating from the ever watchful Hillbuzz. I think we can all benefit from that advice. The answer to date seems to be, fax machines!

Our Twitter list for developments in the Middle East. Hashtags: #Egypt #Jan25

! Oh, and while we are watching the Egyptian revolution in motion, let's keep our eye on the ball in Lebanon too. Hezbollah is now running it as an Iranian eparchy and Rami G. Khouri at the Daily Star thinks they should be given a fair chance!

Updating as more information becomes available.

Related

Who Lost Egypt?

- Caroline Glick: "The Pragmatic Fantasy" (On the dangers of Kifaya and Muslim Brotherhood tool and leader in waiting, ElBaradei)

Effectively Communicating Jihad: a spade is a spade

Politeia is honoured indeed to have gained permission by the author to publish this highly important essay on how strategic communications on the War on Terror against militant Islamism can be improved. These pages have adopted, effective immediately, his recommendations with regard to idiom related to terrorism and Jihad. We heartily encourage the readership to follow suit.

Sam C. Holliday is a graduate of the U. S. Military Academy at West Point, a former director of Stability Studies at the Army War College, and a retired Army Colonel. He earned a Master's in Public Affairs from the University of Pittsburgh and a doctorate in International Relations from the University of South Carolina. Currently he is Director of The Armiger Cromwell Center, a small nonprofit Internet clearinghouse for thinking "outside of the box of conventional wisdom." By means of its online essays, the ACC seeks more effective foreign policies to achieve stability through equilibrium.


EFFECTIVE COMMUNICATION AGAINST THE THIRD JIHAD

The apparent renunciation of terrorism by the person who provided the rationale for the global Muslim revivalist movement presents an opportunity for the United States to improve its performance in strategic communication.

In Foundations of Preparation for Jihad, Sayid Imam al-Sharif prescribed a Third Jihad for the Islamization of the world. Al-Sharif founded the Egyptian Islamic Jihad; his supporters assassinated President Anwar Sadat in 1981 and he was with Osama Bin Laden in Afghanistan fighting against the Soviet Union. He is a medical doctor and was an associate of Ayman al-Zawahiri, another Egyptian doctor, who is now Osama Bin Laden's deputy. Al-Sharif was captured after 9/11 and has been in an Egyptian jail since 2004.

There have been several reports that Al-Sharif will soon publish a book in which he states that the use of terror, and the killing of innocent nonbelievers, in the name of Jihad, violate the Qur’an. On July 27, 2007, the Guardian (London) reported him as citing the injunction: “Fight in the cause of God those who fight you, but do not transgress the limits; for God loveth not transgressors. Qur'an 2:190” In other words, he now condemns the violence that has been an integral part of all three Jihads. This would mean a modification in how to achieve the Great Caliphate.

A caliphate, which combines religious and political authority, is the only form of governance approved by traditional Islamic theology. There have been caliphates in the Middle East since the seventh century. The Great Caliphate is a goal; it would replace all secular governments from Morocco to Indonesia with a single caliphate that would then be able to convert the rest of the world to Islam. This was Al-Sharif's original vision that has had a major influence on the global Muslim revivalist movement—an effort to achieve Islamic conquest through violence known to its partisans as the Third Jihad.

It has been reported that Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama Bin Laden's deputy in Al Qaeda, is very unhappy with Al-Sharif's recantation since it might cause many others to question their basic ideas about the Third Jihad. Also it has been reported that hundreds of other former Islamic militants now imprisoned are prepared to join Al-Sharif in renouncing the use of violence to spread their beliefs and are ready to accept the free flow of religious ideas.

~ The entire essay is published on the Articles Database here ~

... Our enemies have called their cause Jihad (holy war), and their assassins "mujahiddin" (holy warriors), or Servants of Allah, or “martyrs.” All of these have positive emotional and religious connotations ...This usage is both inaccurate and dangerous. The leaders of the Third Jihad have exploited this weakness. ... By accurately stating that we are fighting against evildoers—not holy warriors, we can remove some of the communication advantage that the leaders of the Third Jihad have enjoyed. We must reach out and hold our people, our enemies, and people around the world ...

Copyright © 2007 Armiger Cromwell Center


Update: "Al Qaeda Associate Renounces Third Jihad", 17th December 2007

In his posting here on 21st October Dr Sam Holliday, director of the Armiger Cromwell Center in "Effectively Communicating Jihad: a spade is a spade" reported that Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, one of the least public yet most important figures in the Third global Jihad, would shortly be making a public renunciation. This has now been the case. This morning Dr Holliday drew our attention to the article on the Middle East Media Research Institute MEMRI's Special Dispatch No. 1785 >>>