I fear the masses there know what they don’t like [and they are quite right], but don’t know how to get they want.
Are they Austrian Economists? Will they instinctively grasp that they need economic freedom and everything else will follow?
I doubt it. My guess is they will want to “soak the rich”, or “give everyone his fair share”.
Sigh.
David Boaz, executive vice president of the Cato Institute, received an email from Khelil Bouarrouj, a Tunisian-American libertarian, disagreeing with his pessimism of what is to follow in Tunisia:
While Tunisia has never been a true democracy, the largely educated middle class in the nation is well-learned when it comes to the principles of a free society. The regime’s authoritarianism does not speak for the courageous Tunisian lawyers, activists and students; along with the general professional class. Tunisians know what a free press looks like. They’ve seen it around the world when they travel and social networks have served as a dissident channel. And let me add without hyperbole that on Saturday Tunisians awoke to a free press. The usually propagandistic state television changed its logo (which was a regime ensign) and became a voice for free debate with call-ins from average Tunisians. The private media was hosting panel discussions and it was stunning: people have shaken off the fear, and educated journalists and other civil society individuals were openly debating and discussing a whole host of issues. The newspapers that were published that morning ceased with self-censorship, and their coverage and editorials became free forums. A casual reader and observer of the press/media would conclude that it is dominated by a liberal social class with strong democratic values and articulation. In short, the past absence of an institutionalized free press does not mean that Tunisians do not understand the merit of free debate and differing voices. They always have and needed only the opportunity to breathe, which they have now seized.
This lesson, I believe, applies to democracy as well. The fact is that liberal social norms have been ingrained in Tunisian culture: a secular state, equal rights for women, higher education, religious tolerance, etc. I do not state this as a patriot, who has certainly been emotionally moved in recent days, but as an observer who has numerous family and friends in the nation and been engaged in countless political discussions.
The images of the protesters themselves tell a story. Unlike in other Arab nations, the opposition was not uncouth Islamists but a liberal middle class and students. The demonstrations at colleges had Arab youth spell out the word freedom (which was widely evoked during the month), and this was not just a slogan but a genuinely understood ideal. The nation is ready to be a true democracy and truly entrench democratic values. The cultural ethos is already democratic and this is what led to the protests, defining their voice and even the demand that the transition government adhere to the very letter of the constitution. After the president fled, the prime minister took over but Tunisian lawyers immediately declared it unconstitutional (as it was), along with buzzing messages on Facebook by the newly energized populace, and within hours the premier handed power to the speaker of the parliament according to the constitution. The high court has declared that elections shall be held in 60 days per the constitution as well.
Tunisians wanted to start off right with respect for the rule of law. And that’s just it: this nation has been democratic at heart; the recipe for democracy if you will, and the rule of law is understood, respected by Tunisians and had been upheld even under the past regime with the obvious exception of the corrupt and now dethroned ruling elite. Tunisians precisely threw them out because of their repressive rule and flagrant abuse of the law. And the fact is that the people are so committed to a free, democratic Tunisia and the rule of law that they did not acquiesce to an unconstitutional transfer of power, even though they had achieved their main objective of expelling the president and the premier was going to reign solely as a temporary president until elections are held.
Again: people wanted to start a new dawn without compromise on the rule of law. It is no trivial matter that even in the excitement and shock of victory people still thought about the constitutional provision and demanded it be respected. One may have believed that the people would have been elated and surfeit to achieve a monumental victory, unprecedented in the Arab world for a popular revolt to bring down an Arab tyrant, and not bothered with a provision, which would appear to be minor in context of the historic day and new beginning, and which is ultimately inconsequential since the caretaker would leave after elections. But they were not, and that speaks volumes. I have been glued to Facebook updates, the best pulse of the nation right now, and after the premier assumed power Tunisians immediately noted that this is unconstitutional and began to demand his removal. Tunisians wanted the constitution to be respected from Day One and it was the people who made it happen, again. On Facebook, the sentiment is unanimous: a clean break with the ruling party, respect for the rule of law, free and fair elections, and upholding the constitution. After such a dear victory, the widely heard pronouncement is that the people will not be complacent and are ready and willing to eagerly guard their rights and see to it that a democracy worthy of its name will be planted in Tunisia.
After Friday, the Tunisia people have earned with great sacrifice their freedom, and the people are determined that their God-given rights shall not slip an inch and are closely watching the transition as the proverbial vanguards of liberty, and the people will see to it that their hope will be made concrete. The nation is ready and while no democracy is perfect and all democracies are often in a state of oscillation, Tunisia is the best bet and hope for the Arab world’s first real liberal democracy. And I believe it will be a model for the rest of the region.
TY Gero.
Note that free enterprise and small govt werent mentioned in that email.
Democracy is OK, rule of law is good, free speech is great, but I’m still not sure they get it.
However, I am more optimistic than before your post.
BTW, do you think the lawyers in the USA will ever lead a revolution?
Sounds exactly like the standard rhetoric of civil rights activists looking to copy the good ol’ welfare-warfare model.
where do you see welfare warfare?
This is social democrat speak.
My only thoughts: Democracy seems to be sweeping the Arab world, and the US occupation of Iraq has absolutely NOTHING to do with it. Waste of money, lives, and capital, anyone? I think so.
The Egyptian Government just turned off the internet.
I remember when some city rebelled in Syria a few years back. They were basically wiped off the map. Good luck Suez.
They are going from bad to worse. The answer to authoritarianism is not democracy, but local autonomy or, at the very least, monarchy. Tunisia and perhaps Egypt and Yemen too will now degrade into pseudo-socialist failed states. Just how much of that the dumb masses will take before turning to either an islamist dictator or an authoritarian (secular) leader, that is to be seen.
Things do not look good. Perhaps 2011 will be for the middle east what 1918 was for Europe.
I have predicted for many years that Egypt is the real ticking timebomb of the Muslim world and many agreed with me.
A measure of how bad things truly are can be gauged by this: on Wednesday Gamal Mubarak, Osni Mubarak’s second son, arrived in London on a private jet with his whole family and tons of luggage. Hosni Mubarak, now 83, has been trying to push his youngest as his successor for the past few years. Gamal is deeply unpopular and there’s little doubt he either fled the country himself or was sent to a safe place by his father. Either way his chances at becoming the new “Pharaoh” are becoming slimmer and slimmer. This also means things are getting nastier than the press says: either Mubarak is ready to give in to at least some demands or he’s preparing to drown the protests in blood.
Problem is a heavy handed approach could buy some time but it risks provoking a blowback of immense proportions: any action by Mubarak would look like being inspired or at the very least approved by Washington and we all know how much people in that part of the world already love the US. The Israelis, with their typical arrogance, say there’s no immediate risk and Mubarak will “easily” be able to crush the protests. They are probably right. But don’t be surprised if in a year or so somebody blows up an airliner or a train station screaming “Death to America!”.
The Soviet empire ended when revolutions took place in its client states. Is this the death-knell of the American empire?
Smiling Dave, I know of nothing in North African, Middle Eastern, or Meditteranean culture that condemns huge accumulations of wealth, and indeed, cities like Dubai, Kuwait, Qatar, Riyadh.etc are areas notorious for decadence and hedonism among both the general population and the rich, with much value given to material things like fancy cars. (I find it repulsive, to be honest)
With the kind of generous subsidies they have in Libya, the Libyans don’t even seem to care who is rich, provided they can get some cheap fuel for their car and cooker. If we have to go even further east, ordinary Iranians have no popular anger against rich Iranians, because they too get nearly 90% subsidies on many things they buy.
Oil money earned by the state is an obvious reason for such countries not wanting to “soak the rich”. “Soaking the rich” seems to be a purely western concept, where a household earning yearly $50,000 (100 times that of an African household) is angry that there are households earning $1,000,000, so it’s unfair for western people to be materially well endowed when other western people are materially very well endowed.
Man this thing is advancing rapidly… today whole police units refused to charge the protestors. Hundreds of policemen have already deserted and joined the raging crowds. Egypt’s much vaunted security apparatus is crumbling rapidly. But Mubarak has one ally left: the army. Infantry units have already deployed in Alexandria, Suez and The Cairo. In the meantime the Internet has been disabled in the whole country, as well as cellular phone networks. Mubarak is playing the last gamble of his life: ordering the army to crush the protests may save his regime for the few years he has left but could have catastrophic results. Millions (not just Muslims) are watching al-Jazeera and al-Arabiya. The Internet may be disabled but true reporters are managing to keep the news coming. If the army fires on the crowd everybody will see what “friends” the US has. We may be well start seeing the end of the Pax Americana.
Allow me to spend a few words about that old fox, Mohammed El-Baradei. His arrival in Egypt was perfectly timed and he put himself in a position to be seen both as a popular hero and a true friend of democracy. Yet while he was living abroad in confort at everybody’s expenses (UN), the Muslim Brotherhood was doing the dirty job on the ground, enduring the beating, the jailing and the torturing and building a vast network of sympathizers through their charities. Problem is the Muslim Brotherhood is too… Muslim for the West’s liking. El-Baradei is instead a soft-spoken UN scoundrel who may be perfect to lead a “transition” government should Mubarak do the only sensible thing: cut and run.
Believe me, the Egyptians would be much better off having the Muslim Brothers running the country than a former UN mandarin.
Kakugo, the BBC has reported that protesters have been chanting for the army to intervene today, believing them to be allies against the police forces. This was also just posted:
1608: Al Jazeera TV reports that military trucks arrive in a Cairo square to the cheers of protesters.
Seems as if ordinary Egyptians view the military as an ally against the regime and the security appartus.
Agree here. I think that they one gang will change with the other gang and will all be the same. Also, US wouldn’t let them to become more free than they are now. I mean, something related to free market society is a dream, impossibility.
I mean, something related to free market society is a dream, impossibility.
With the current mindset of 90%+ of the world population, it certainly is!
"They are going from bad to worse. The answer to authoritarianism is not democracy, but local autonomy or, at the very least, monarchy. "
Seems like you’re jumping the gun. What is ‘local autonomy’?
Many Arab states have monarchies. Not much benefit or difference, if not being absolutely terrible: ala Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait. How exactly are these countries ‘answers’ again?
" the BBC has reported that protesters have been chanting for the army to intervene today, believing them to be allies against the police forces."
That’s our 1.3 billion dollars per year in tax dollars at work. Let’s hope it doesn’t just mow down the whole city.
I assume they pay for their own police forces. If so, if the military fights the police, it’s almost like Americans are fighting their police.
If they kill everyone, it’s almost like we killed everyone.
What is ‘local autonomy’?
Full autonomy for Egyptian cities and towns. Cairo and Alexandria need not have the same laws and taxes. Turn Egypt into a NATO-like military alliance of sovereign cities and regions, with a British Commonwealth-like honorary joint head of state.
Many Arab states have monarchies. Not much benefit or difference, if not being absolutely terrible: ala Jordan, Saudi Arabia, Morocco, Qatar, Oman, Bahrain, Kuwait. How exactly are these countries ‘answers’ again?
Need I say any more?
Pleas note that the ME has an ‘abnormal’ concentration of some of the wealthiest countries per capita. All monarchies.
Neither Tunisia, nor Egypt or Yemen, the current revolutionary countries, are monarchies. All where in the past, to my knowledge. Egypt, above all, was on the brink of becoming a near eastern hegemon and displace the Ottoman Empire (hadn’t it been for Russian intervention)under its former dynasty, while Nasser only managed to send his troops to help Israel test its new army. All three are poor and unstable. Not one of the regional monarchies is either.
So, I see a BIG difference between republics and monarchies in the region.
