The Egyptian story is pretty much similar to other stories set within revolutionary eras; aspects of the Egyptian Culture remained untouchable for a long time before the protests hit the streets and the political changes started hitting people’s minds.
People tend to believe that a dictator is formidable and that he will keep controlling a country until he is dead, that his system can manipulate and manage events to boost its power and portray its strength, and that fighting a tyrant might be honorable but will always be useless. Indeed this description fits the majority of people living in a dictatorship, while a minority of citizens may believe that change is possible and that they have to push for an end to tyranny. When a revolution is successful, or becomes portrayed as a successful effort to influence the way a country is governed, it has the greatest influence of satisfaction on this minority; giving them a chance to finally say “We’re right, we’ve been right all the way”, while causing a state of disruption among the
majority of citizens, who could not possibly see that change was coming. When people believe that a dictator could not be overthrown and then they suddenly view him out of office; whether killed, imprisoned, put to trial, or forced to flee… they start to examine their wrong belief, along with every notion that led them to it. Once they start to examine a single belief, they become ready to
question every other conception. In the Egyptian revolution of 2011, protests started in January 25th, set against a President who had been ruling the country for about 30 years; perhaps the majority of protesters were not old enough to know or remember life in
Egypt before he became President.
People tend to believe that a dictator is formidable and that he will keep controlling a country until he is dead, that his system can manipulate and manage events to boost its power and portray its strength, and that fighting a tyrant might be honorable but will always be useless. Indeed this description fits the majority of people living in a dictatorship, while a minority of citizens may believe that change is possible and that they have to push for an end to tyranny. When a revolution is successful, or becomes portrayed as a successful effort to influence the way a country is governed, it has the greatest influence of satisfaction on this minority; giving them a chance to finally say “We’re right, we’ve been right all the way”, while causing a state of disruption among the majority of citizens, who could not possibly see that change was coming. When people believe that a dictator could not be overthrown and then they suddenly view him out of office; whether killed, imprisoned, put to trial, or forced to flee… they start to examine their wrong belief, along with every notion that led them to it. Once they start to examine a single belief, they become ready to question every other conception. In the Egyptian revolution of 2011, protests started in January 25th, set against a President who had been ruling the country for about 30 years; perhaps the majority of protesters were not old enough to know or remember life in Egypt before he became President.
Mohamed Hosni Mubarak represented this formidable tyrant that most of the citizens believed would stay in power as long as he was alive, and may only pass on the Presidency to his son Gamal Mubarak, who was being promoted by the state as an influential leader who would give a higher degree of involvement to Egyptian youth in the decision making process, while boosting the economy.Before that time, the “National Party of Egypt”, the ruling party back then, opened its doors wide open for membership; it reached roughly three million members before the revolution started; most of which were inactive members who sought to have the party’s ID as a tool to protect themselves from the random potential harassment of policemen; who were entitled to stop anyone on the streets, treat them as suspects for no reason and lock them up for some time in a police station. Protests were set in Tahrir Square in Cairo, the capital city of Egypt, and in other major squares and locations in multiple cities. Protesters represented the minority of Egyptian citizens in the first three days, Jan25th, 26th, and 27th. Only by Friday, January 28th that a huge number of people joined the protests in the afternoon, after the Muslim’s Friday prayers, police forces were not capable of controlling the situation. After a series of battles, hundreds to thousands of civilians were killed, some police stations were burned, multiple prisons’ doors were suddenly wide open, and almost all Egyptian police forces ditched the streets. The country was left without policing, people started to cooperate in almost all neighborhoods, in order to protect their districts from potential crimes and robbery.
Nationalism was on the rise in Egypt, after the Egyptian
Revolution of 2011, the rising sense of belonging that
was mixed with hopes for a better future have led different groups to have
different “Nationalistic Dreams”. Some thought Egypt will rise from the ashes,
and become a leading nation, some thought it was a great chance for the country
to regain its regional pan-Arab influence, while others thought it was the
perfect time for Egypt to lead “Muslim Nations”, indeed after applying “Islamic
Law” within the state. The only common feeling was the sense of Nationalism, a
sense of belonging to a Nation that is yet to be formed/reformed, statements
such as “Proud to be Egyptian” and “A Proud Egyptian” were spread over
Egyptians’ Social Media profiles. Apart from the
extreme sense of belonging, times of revolutions are usually encouraging for
most citizens to express their unpopular thoughts, and reflect on a
global Philosophical
Legacy that was built over centuries, while discussing contemporary
issues such as nationalism, corporate
life, gender pay gap, social
media’s influence on world events… There was a
state of fear, confusion, uncertainty, but there was hope; enough hope for
people to participate in protests and sit-ins like Mohamed Mahmoud Incidents, while believing that they were capable of influencing the
country’s regime and forcing it to comply with their demands of building a
future of fairness and freedom.
In the contemporary tribal world, our lives are mostly based on the places and times
of birth, a person’s contribution to humanity lies in differentiation rather
than conformity. For that reason, the spread of common discomfort resulting
from cognitive dissonance among a group of people can fuel analytical
dialogues, and help people develop a norm of digging deep into issues instead
of settling for the easy superficial answers, which are usually provided by
politicians and most public figures in any society. It is the same common factor among the most influential
people of all time, regardless of their fields to attempt at defying norms and
conventions, in order to help elevate our comprehension of several life
aspects. If Newton followed the suit of his people, he would have settled for eating the apple
instead of discovering gravity. If Nietzsche did not question the philosophical
premise built by ancient Greek Philosophers like Socrates, he would not have
introduced his groundbreaking philosophical approach. If Moses, Jesus, or Muhammad
followed the traditions of their own people, while blindingly submitting to the
set conventions, none of them would have been capable of spreading Judaism,
Christianity and Islam. Breaking the
norm is not always the best option, in some cases it may have led some people
to come up with toxic ideas like race superiority, but in other cases, it led
activists to put an end to slavery, to secure woman suffrage, and terminate
multiple evils that people used to consider normal. In all cases, the thought
process is what matters the most, and eras in which people have a chance to
rethink how their societies should ideally operate, while allowing themselves
to be exposed to unorthodox ideas are absolutely awesome. Confusion
can be healthy sometimes; at least it indicates that people are thinking about
life aspects instead of taking everything for granted. Unfortunately, this era
did not last for a long time in Egypt, people were perplexed when Hosni Mubarak
was overthrown, and when the police forces showed up as the weak side in front
of the masses. When the Supreme Council for Armed Forces ruled the country for
about a year and a half, people started realizing that changing the name of the
President does not essentially imply that the system has changed. When the next
president was elected, he tried to become the next dictator, as he and the
Muslim Brotherhood group behind him tried to maintain Mubarak’s dictatorship,
but he only lasted a single year as he could not maintain his relatively low
level of popularity among the Egyptian people, and more importantly, he could
not maintain the support of army leaders. President Sisi was appointed by the former president as the head of the Egyptian army, before he overthrew him, and now things are back to normal. The stability of Sisi's dictatorship have led to a state of stagnation; silencing opposition while killing hopes and innovation across Egypt.
Related Books:
No comments:
Post a Comment