As the dust settles and protestors prepare for negotiations likely to last weeks, Egypt looks ahead to a renewed future;
and with Tunisia it is now experiencing the pangs of a nascent, free democracy. For centuries North Africa toiled under the yokes of empires from the Ptolemies and the Romans to the Ottomans, French, and British. In the mid-twentieth century the people of Egypt, Tunisia, Algeria, and Libya gained independence from their European overlords only to suffer beneath kleptocracies and tyrants. Egypt itself has an even longer history of autocratic control dating back to the Pharaohs of the Old Kingdom. When the Pharaohs’ power waned, the priests rose, and entrenched a theocratic tradition that still haunts Egypt today. Through Isis cults, Christianity, and finally Islam, religion has also dominated Egypt and the Maghreb. For seven thousand years the people have suffered and been slowly conditioned by church and by state to accept their place as slaves.
In the West we fixate on the specifics of the recent protests, how activists used social media to organize, whether the demonstrations will produce lasting democracy or just enthrone a new strongman, and how other nations in the Muslim world will respond. These questions, while pertinent and intriguing, miss the larger, more important conclusions to be drawn.
Many commentators were quick to point out Facebook’s integral role in organizing the Jasmine Revolution and Egypt’s demonstrations, but few have concentrated on the non-logistical influence of the Internet. The Internet is the greatest disseminator of ideas the world has ever known. It exposes users to literally millions of different ideas and views, which all compete for prominence and recognition. No arbiter exists on the Internet to decide which views are acceptable and which are not; no authority to demand respect or servile deference. Not even a rough code of conduct exists, and that’s a good thing. The Internet reminded the people of Tunisia and Egypt, so long hereditary bondsmen, what freedom tastes like. The Internet was not only the organization vehicle of the movement, but its goad. The oppressed and the hungry are often willing to tolerate those sorry states because they know nothing better; but once they have savored freedom they will not bear the insult of slavery.
More than anything else the actions of the past few weeks have eroded the old order. The deposition of Zine El Abidine Ben Ali and the imminent ousting of Hosni Mubarak may not herald a new attachment to liberal democracy or the end of kleptocracy in the Maghreb. In fact, a successful new government in any country now gripped by discontent is unlikely. It may take many more attempts to build a free society in the Arab world. Ultimately, the immediate outcome of these protests is unimportant compared to the societal shift evidenced by them. The protests represent a declaration by the people of the individual’s sovereignty over his mind and his body—an egalitarian demand for the dignity due to all people. This marks a radical departure from the tribalism and sectarianism of the region’s past. This movement is not one focused on expelling foreign invaders or purifying the country of infidels: there is no Mahdi and there is no holy war. This movement is unique in that its focus is truly on the citizen. It is a repudiation of government excess and absolutism and an affirmation of individual liberty.
When we worry about stability in the region and the reaction of neighboring countries, we limit our vision. While such speculation is valuable and necessary, it should not be overemphasized. Taking a longer look at the situation reveals a probable outcome: increased freedom across the Muslim world. Already journalists, scholars, and analysts forecast a future for the Jasmine Revolution that parallels the Velvet Revolution of 1989. Slowly, perhaps very slowly, the fervor that swept up Tunisians and Egyptians will percolate across borders and prevail over the remaining despots. With luck, the ideals of liberty will sweep across Africa and Asia as swiftly as the area was conquered by the Caliphs. The West must not try to retard the spread by supporting dictators. If the West stands by people seeking their freedom, as the culture that produced the Enlightenment should, it will be assured of standing on the right side of history.
Popularity: 22% [?]
I think we’re already seeing the effect on the Arab world. Jordan and Syria have lowed the price of foodstuffs and allowed for more freedoms.
I feel like the Internet was used as a tool for organizing and not as much for disseminating the ideal of revolution. The thought of revolution has been in the air since imperialism, and the 2008 garment workers strike led by the April 6th Youth Movement demonstrates that. The January 25th protest was planned last year. A cable leaked by wikileaks shows the US knew about all this but didn’t take it seriously. But that was before the Tunisian uprising galvanized the people of the Arab world. In Tunisia the Internet was more used to get information out (and in) but in Egypt it was more used to organize.
Also, I don’t think the media is paying enough attention to the trade unionist, the A6YM, socialist and the anarchist that are playing pivotal rolls in these demonstrations. The media has latched onto the Muslim Brotherhood (who are way watered down and not at all like the MB in other Arab countries) and made this all about them. They weren’t even supportive of the protests until last Friday. Also, the MB is calling for a secular Egypt from my understanding.
You’ll definitely get a filtered view of things from the media. That’s another great thing about the Internet, the reader can distill the truth for himself much easier than he could by just watching CNN.
But to clarify my thesis:
I think there is a different tone to this revolution than there was during, say, the ousting of the French from Algeria in the fifties and sixties. The anti-imperialist/colonialist fights all over the world were centered around expelling the foreign power. The autocrats were accepted mostly because they weren’t French or English. Now, I see this revolution as not accepting even native overlords. Each citizen feels truly empowered to stake a claim for his own life and his own liberty, and he’s not going to accept the overreach of a dictator.
The Internet is just the mechanism that sped up this affirmation of human rights, I think. It also significantly reduced the “cost” of starting a revolution. There’s no one instant or website you could point to that would be responsible for this. Cultural shift is large, usually slow, and imperceptible until it reaches a flashpoint.