Revolution in Egypt: What does it mean?

[Lepton]

So, Egypt is currently flooded with protesters on the streets of Cairo, Alexandria, and Suez. They are calling for the resignation of President Mubarak, as well as social changes such as increased social freedoms, an abandonment of the use of torture by police forces, and policies to decrease unemployment. There are, of course, parallels that might be drawn to Tunisia, where the "Jasmine Revolution" ousted that country's long-term dictator earlier this month.

Today, Mubarak dismissed his cabinet and it seems that he largely withdrew police forces from the streets in favor of the army. The former seems to have impressed no-one. The latter was supposed to be his trump card: as a former military man, and given the social role of the military in Egypt, it was expected that bringing the military to the streets would be the only way Mubarak could hold on to power. However, this seems to have backfired, as the army (largely citizens completing compulsory service) failed to act against the demonstrators and in many cases seemed to support their cause.

So, it seems like Egypt is facing a significant change. I feel like this will echo through the future, but I'm not sure how... Any thoughts?

Also, why "protestErs" and "demonstratOrs"?

[Lepton]

Oh, apparently it's a phonetic thing. Verbs ending with a "t" sound get an "or" when they become actors; "er" is the standard ending.

[Chaz]

It did my heart happy to see the military turn against it's controlling force in favor of the greater good.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[wordcross]

The thing about revolution is that there has to be something else to replace whatever is being ousted. Otherwise the void will be filled by whatever group has the power to fill it, which is whatever group had that power before. The names will change, but the overall situation will end up being largely the same. I'm sure that there will be some visible changes, such as a law offering what seems like more freedoms of speech or what-have-you, but it will be mostly cosmetic.

If a revolution is to succeed, there has to be something viable that has planned out as fully as possible so that there is *not* a void waiting to be filled by whoever gets to it first. This revolution is not based on such a plan, even though certain groups (e.g. "Muslim Brotherhood") have started to back the revolution now that it has gained momentum. That means there is a potential conflict of interest between those who started it and those who want to finish it.

I'm glad it's happening, but don't expect it to change the world. It's only a small step.
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[Chaz]

I can agree with that.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[JF*]

There seems to be many calls for freedom...which is encouraging. The next government (or the current one), will claim to provide it. I hope the people will be able to create a Bill of Rights type document that can withstand the future encroachment of government.

[Chaz]

I doubt it though...

They're calling for abandonment of the use of torture by the police, and the decrease of unemployment. Decrease of unemployment is certainly the more ridiculous of the the two demands.
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[Antrax]

[Chaz]

I know that Egypt is a country, where Cleopatra was from, and Rome ruled over at one point. (I had no idea things were so bad there.)
_________________
The enemy's base is down.

[Quailman]

Some people prefer North Africa, but I prefer to put my armies in Egypt, to go after Africa while protecting it from the Middle East and Southern Europe.

[Samadhi]

[Samadhi]

[Samadhi]

Do we have any troops in Israel? Just wondering. We have 30k 10k in the UK of all places. AFAIK we don't in Israel.

[Edit: We have 30k in S. Korea, 10k in UK. Both ridiculous.]
[Edit2: Don't even get me started on Japan and Germany (and all Europe)]
_________________
And he lived happily ever after. Except for the dieing at the end and the heartbreak in between.

[Death Mage]

What *IS* out exit strategy for Germany and Japan anyway? It's been over 60 damn years and we're still wasting HOW much there every year? Will WWII ever end?!
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Lepton*]

For leadership, do you think a certain former UN bureaucrat and Nobel prize winner could cull together a transitional government?

Also, has anyone noticed that Al Jazeera seems to be swinging sharply away from "Western Democracies" impartiality and more toward Arabic talking points? It seems like much of their "coverage" consists of editorials decrying the USA for not denouncing Mubarak more swiftly.

[Zag]

I never knew that Al Jazeera was anything other than hateful towards western democracies. I guess I formed my opinion of them as the vehicle through which bin Laden has released all his videos, which made me assume they were more extreme than they were.

[wordcross]

Al-Jazeera is no more or less biased than any western news outlet, just in a different direction.
_________________
Has anyone really been far even as decided to use even go want to do look more like?

[Antrax]

[Samadhi]

[Lepton*]

Samadhi: Russia, China... the other geographically-large countries have concentrated populations (Brazil, Canada, Australia, India, etc).

Wordcross: I was in that school of thought for a while, and quite happy about it. However, take a look at their coverage of the "Palestine Papers". I'm not a huge fan of how Israel's foreign policy (sorry Antrax!), but that stuff is more one-sided than the worst Rush/Beck paranoia (to use an American example) -- not mainstream news coverage. I mean that their bias is quite a bit more clear than what you'd see in the NY Times, the Guardian, or the WSJ. In my reading, of course.

[Pablo]

[extro...*]

I'm curious as to what effect, if any, this might all have on the security of the boarder between Egypt and Gaza, and eventual repercussions.

[Samadhi]

Pablo: When the Congress pushes threw a jet design that the military says they don't need, it's bad.

Beyond that I think you're sounding too frenzied and counterproductive. Do I, like you, want us out of everywhere but here? YES. But the way you say it sounds....well...crazy and conspiracy nut like. You're dialed to 11 man.
_________________
And he lived happily ever after. Except for the dieing at the end and the heartbreak in between.

[AcidFast]

Sam: lol - I wish we would scale back the military, as well. All this talk of cutting back spending, and very little talk of cutting back a defense budget that has grown out of control - that really pisses me off. Do you know that there is a guy who stands at the exit to our Dining Facility (DFAC) to take your tray out of your hand, and place it in a rack (in Iraq) as you exit? I wonder how much the American taxpayers are paying this guy (through a contractor, of course, but the cost ultimately falls on the taxpayers...).

Anyway, not that I am an expert in world affairs, but I have had the oppurtunity to live in Egypt for two months, so I know the place a bit better than your average American. I have never been a fan of Mubarek; he is, with a few notable exceptions, a typical dictator who lives in luxury while his people starve. The country looks a lot like some of the worst areas of Iraq.

I would like to see what a revolution would change but, unfortunately, they rarely change things much, as has been stated. I am hopeful, but not counting on anything.
_________________
When I get sad, I stop being sad and be awesome instead

True story

[Antrax]

[Lepton*]

As a demonstration of what I mean, I went to Al Jazeera's English home page and scrolled down until I saw a headline article on something controversial: the Goldstone Report. Then I found some coverage on The Guardian. From those two links, compare the language (I'm trying to pick representative samples, and avoid cherry-picking):

Al Jazeera:

[Antrax]

Like I said, Al Jazeera is less embarrassed about being biased. I actually prefer the obvious bias, because more people tend to believe what they read in the Guardian, sadly believing it to be objective.
_________________
After years of disappointment with get rich quick schemes, I know I'm gonna get rich with this scheme. And quick!

[Pablo]

[Lepton*]

Fair enough, Antrax! I mainly posted because I realized I wasn't being clear as to what I meant. I'll certainly continue to read Al Jazeera for "internal" news about the Arabic world.

[Quailman]

My schedule is back to nromal this week - no more being glued to CNN to see if Egypt would come unglued. I must say it was satisfying to see the demonstrators remain for the most part peaceful. Even when Mubarak gave his non-resignation speech they did not get violent. My favorite image is when the crowd was swaying in unison and singing "Allah we are asking, is give peace a chance."

[Death Mage]

I'm surprised this thread is not more active, given the continuing events, and the fact that it has been spreading to other countries.

There has been some concern from people that the change in Egypt will tilt it more toward a militant Islamic regime, shades of Iran in the 70's. I'm fairly certain this is not the goal of most of the protesters, but a stricter Islamic group may have the best structure and chance to seize power with the speed needed to win the power vacuum. We'll see what happens in the coming months.

But it's been spreading like wildfire through the region as well. This could just be their equivalent of a Tea-Party like movement, a strong grass-roots effort to change the government (though it's becoming more and more violent, such as in Libya, where many government buildings have been burned. But there's also a good possibility that the events are being pushed along, even organized, by what I've been calling the new face of terrorism.

Terrorists are not all a bunch of idiots, who try the same things over and over despite changing security measures to prevent it. Bombing a building is obvious, and a lot of places are on lookout for suspicious events. However, a "spontaneous" riot is a lot harder to prevent, can do just as much damage - if not more - and not only doesn't get traced back to you, but will make several people in the world apologize to you. Look at the 2005 Danish cartoons riots. Several embassies were attacked and burned over a perceived insult. However, once the details are pealed away, those rioting were prodded onward by misinformation, pictures circulating that angered people were NOT the danish cartoons, but such things as a photograph from a French pig-squealing contest. People were using the situation to rile anger, and get the crowds to do their dirty work for them. Similar riots through out the world, such as the riots in France in 2005, and potentially again in 2009, were geared at causing as much property damage as possible, while the rest of the world - those that paid attention anyway - simply tisk-tisk'ed.

Now we have a situation in the middle east where several governments are starting to fall. Some of the riots are more violent than others. This could be another act of radical Islamists riling up the populace into attacking, with a specific set of goals in mind, while the people have other ideas entirely. It is possible that they are setting themselves up to try to fill in as many power vacuums as possible. I certainly hope this is not the case. It really could be that the people are just pissed off, have had enough of their governments, and want to be less oppressed. The spread of information, the Internet, cellphones, etc., that give people instance access to the world (despite government crackdowns and censorship), may be prodding people along. They may even be looking at countries like Iraq and Afghanistan's recent changes, and want change for themselves - one of the original ideas behind the "War on Terror". Set up a few points of democracy and freedom, and let the dominoes fall.

We won't really know which side's going to win the ideological war going on there until the dust settles. But I'm pretty sure we're watching some history in the making taking place across the region right now. I don't see this fading quietly into the night. I just hope the end result is more the latter - less oppression.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Lepton*]

Interesting thesis, DM. I'm not sure I buy it just yet. It's hard for me to imagine Al Qaeda or a similar group socially engineering something like this -- they don't seem to manage finesse very well -- but the future may well bear you out.

On the other hand, if the discontent mirrors what happened with the Tea Party in the USA, I will look forward to the NY Times doing an expose on the billionaire fundamentalist brothers behind it.

[Thok*]

[Death Mage]

It really doesn't take that much prodding to get people who are already unhappy about something to mobilize, especially once others already HAVE. The only real trick then is pointing them in the right direction.
_________________
* These senseless ramblings brought to you by Insanity™. If you just can't figure the dang thing out, it must be Insanity™.
[YOUR AD HERE!]

[Silverfire]

[Zag]

I guess I'd prefer news reporters who are clearly biased to say so, but a news agency can achieve a lot less bias if it is willing to present arguments written by either side. An individual is more believable to me if he can acknowledge the weaknesses in his own argument. He may downplay those, or, better still, explain clearly why he thinks those points are less significant than the ones he feels supports the argument. But the people who can't even acknowledge the flaws in their own ideas strike me as fools who don't really think, they just spout their own prejudices.

There are some on GL like that, by the way. I have (finally) learned to stop trying to discuss with them.

[Pablo]

[JohnnyF*]