Saturday, September 21, 2013

Lucia On expecting to see democracy in the Middle East

I always thought the whole "Arab Spring" thing would never result in anything good. Democracy requires a democratic people, it won't work if the population can't function that way.

Here is a really interesting article from FrontPage by Daniel Greenfield, which explains the situation in Egypt, from the point of view of Westerners expecting to see what's not really there, in the same way that mirages occur in the desert. It's an apt metaphor.

Deserts are funny things. A big wide open space in which nothing moves can play tricks on the mind. Spend enough time looking at a desert and you will see things moving in it because your mind needs to believe that there is life in it. Look hard enough and you will see democracy, progress and change.

But when you close your eyes and open them again, you will see that there is only a desert. And that there only ever was a desert.

Everything else was a mirage.

Egypt has gone back to what it was before the Arab Spring. It is now once again a country ruled by the military and bureaucratic institutions that are the legacy of British colonialism. Mubarak will not return to power again, but there are plenty of other military men to squat on top of a bankrupt oligarchy that lives on foreign aid and pride.

The mirage of Tahrir Square, the fireworks, fires and social media protesters brandishing smartphones and throwing down with riot police, is fading away. There will be more riots and fires and rapes. But that false sense of history being made will never return.

The truth about the Arab Spring is that it never existed. The term was coined by Marc Lynch, a George Washington University professor, who had spent years urging engagement with Hamas and championing the role of the Muslim Brotherhood as a “firewall” against Al-Qaeda “radicalism.”

This Arab Spring had nothing to do with democracy or freedom. It was a scheme to split the Islamist ranks by turning over the Middle East to political Islamists. It was Zbigniew Brzezinski’s Green Belt strategy practiced on a grander scale than Iran. Instead of Jimmy Carter hoping that the Ayatollah Khomeini would checkmate the USSR, there was Barack Obama counting on Muslim Brotherhood election victories to make the practice of international terrorism passé.

The Arab Spring was a cheerful brand, a shiny media package, covering up an ugly truth. The optimistic implications of its name kept many from looking at the list of ingredients and finding out that the only things inside were Islamists and more Islamists.

Read more: The Egyptian Pyramid Scheme ~ FrontPage

5 comment(s):

Psycho Milt said...

There's a persistent conservative narrative that darkies are for the most part ethnically incapable of running a democracy. You'd never guess from their sneering bigotry that there were several centuries between the English revolution and universal adult suffrage. Yes, democracy doesn't work in a country where corruption, influence-peddling and the arbitrary exercise of authority are the norm - but you don't need to look at Arabs for a demonstration of that fact, Russia provides an example much closer to home.

Andrei said...

Russia provides an example much closer to home.

Actually Russia might be more democratic in the 21st century than the good ol' USA, where they sic the IRD onto political opponants or bring bogus prosecutions cf Tom Delay, or Scooter Libby to take out the opposition.

And of course there are always the courts that can be counted on to over ride the democratic will of the majority by finding novel things written into the constitution that would have the drafters of said documents) spinning in their graves if they knew what they had written would be used to justify 250 years later.

Lucia Maria said...


Democracy is something that grew out of European culture. It can't just be transposed somewhere else without the foundations being present. Nothing to do with "darkies".

William Stout said...

I had similar misgivings about the so called "Arab Spring." When the Palestinians went to the polls, they elected the radicals. When Egypt went to the polls, they followed suit. Coptics have been wantonly slain, churches burned, Coptic women raped, and it doesn't get any better. This has been the story across the Middle East. Hard line radicals have come to power and then they pursue the infidel and drive him into the dust. But Islam is a religion of peace and tolerance, right? If so, it has yet to prove itself as such. Thus far, it has proven far deadlier than any Crusade or Crusader.

Islam has taken so many slaves from Europe that if you are of European descent, you likely have relatives in the Middle East. Islam has slain millions since the death of The Prophet (and if you are looking for PBUH, then you really don't know me), and it continues to slay the non-believer and the Muslim that has given up the faith. The Christian church gave up recruiting by the sword 800 years ago, we are still waiting for Al Islam.

Turning back the clock to the Middle Ages may assist the Muslim bloodlust, but it is a poor way to bring a people into the future. When the Muslims finally realize that, then Islam will be a religion of peace.

Lucia Maria said...

Hi William,

I don't Islam will ever be allowed to be a religion of peace, as it seems to breed a percentage of radicals that that keep it violent.

Post a Comment

Please be respectful. Foul language and personal attacks may get your comment deleted without warning. Contact us if your comment doesn't appear - the spam filter may have grabbed it.