Originally posted by Bardock42
Not an expert, but can this really be attributed to the "pro-democracy" movement, rather than the opportunistic military?
it depends on who you define as the pro-democracy group, but I tend to agree with you. The military saw an opportunity to gain back much of the power it lost in the overthrow of Mubarak.
Obviously the western world is deeply uncomfortable at the military arbitrarily causing power shifts like this, as in a properly functioning society that shouldn't be possible.
There's the trouble though- Egypt is not (yet) a properly functioning society, and a thing to be taken on board here is that there is a modern tendency to view democracy as the final goal, the ultimate achievement of a society to be defended at all costs.
Actually, that's never really been the case. The things we associate with modern western society, which I think we can reasonably agree for all its flaws is the best form of global society going, don't actually come from democracy but certain innate rights like the rule of law, free speech, open political debate etc. Whilst we have found democracy to be a very conducive way to reach these things, we have plenty of lessons from history that show us that the two do not necessarily go together, and there is a lingering suspicion that the Muslim Brotherhood, democratic mandate or otherwise, was not going in that direction.
Successful democracy really needs more than just holding elections. There's a cultural shift needed as well.
Originally posted by Ushgarak
Obviously the western world is deeply uncomfortable at the military arbitrarily causing power shifts like this, as in a properly functioning society that shouldn't be possible.There's the trouble though- Egypt is not (yet) a properly functioning society, and a thing to be taken on board here is that there is a modern tendency to view democracy as the final goal, the ultimate achievement of a society to be defended at all costs.
Actually, that's never really been the case. The things we associate with modern western society, which I think we can reasonably agree for all its flaws is the best form of global society going, don't actually come from democracy but certain innate rights like the rule of law, free speech, open political debate etc. Whilst we have found democracy to be a very conducive way to reach these things, we have plenty of lessons from history that show us that the two do not necessarily go together, and there is a lingering suspicion that the Muslim Brotherhood, democratic mandate or otherwise, was not going in that direction.
Successful democracy really needs more than just holding elections. There's a cultural shift needed as well.
Furthermore, isn't it sort of hypocritical to criticize the Egyptian military of abusing the democratic process without looking deeper into the United State's own dubious practices? Various administrations have supported various coups of questionable popular support.
There isn't much hope as it stands. A coalition government is the only answer but unfortunately that is all but impossible as any supporters of sharia such as the Muslim brotherhood believe all law comes from Allah and men don't have the authority to enact law that contradicts sharia. So there would never be any much needed compromise.
I also think there's bigger forces at work. The west has realised the double edged sword of supporting the Arab spring. They helped financially, politically and militarily to remove several non elected but relatively stable and secular regimes which have been replaced with much more hostile (towards western interests) but democratically elected governments. So now the west is stuck in this odd position as being seen to want to support democracy but willing to oust Whoever gets into power if they don't like the result. The only likely reason this has been instigated in Egypt first is it is one of the most strategically important countries in the world because of the Suez canal. Given that one of the Muslim brotherhood's primary goals is to help remove western 'imperialism' from Islamic countries then it's logical to assume they were about to start making things difficult with regards to shipping on the Suez. Imagine what that would do to the world economy. One leading member of the Muslim brotherhood called for the closing of the canal immediately when they 1st came into power and it rocketed oil prices up albeit only for a short time but that was one single comment.
Personally I don't think it'll be the 1st post Arab spring government to fall. Libya will go again within 2 years. The only one that might last is Tunisia but already the political assassinations have started. Here's hoping they can make the most of their tourist boom while it lasts before it all goes **** up again.
Originally posted by jaden101
There isn't much hope as it stands. A coalition government is the only answer but unfortunately that is all but impossible as any supporters of sharia such as the Muslim brotherhood believe all law comes from Allah and men don't have the authority to enact law that contradicts sharia. So there would never be any much needed compromise.
It's also impossible to negotiate with people when you kill 500 of their supporters in the streets of the capitol.
Originally posted by Symmetric Chaos
It's also impossible to negotiate with people when you kill 500 of their supporters in the streets of the capitol.
Even if there was no killing it'd still be impossible for any kind of coalition. Democracy and governance of law enacted by man is completely at odds with sharia. Secular or non Muslims will not accept governance under sharia and the Muslim brotherhood won't accept anything but sharia. There is no middle ground.
Can you imagine though if really hard line Muslims got into power and did to the pyramids what they did in Afghanistan to the giant Buddhas of Bamiyan?
I understand democracy should be held no matter what, but what happens when ideals aren't enough? It was clear Morsi was going to establish a repressive theocracy if he remained in power any longer. They gave him a chance. He refused. I understand, as an ideal, that the Muslims of Egypt have the free right to support Morsi, but he was going to violate human rights. If Obama stands behind Morsi's supporters, he backs the ideal of democracy, but if he stands behind the pro-coup supporters, he stands behind human rights, and I think that's more important.
All I know is all eyes will be on the PotUS. All eyes. I would love to see Mitt Romney handle this situation.
Originally posted by Omega Vision
I don't know if I've ever heard of Muslims in Egypt who hated the pyramids. I think all Egyptians realize that if it weren't for their archaeological wealth, Egypt would be another forgotten country like Sudan or Oman.
Nobody hated the Buddha statues in Afghanistan enough to blow them up until they did. Amazing what opportunity can do. I'm sure there are hard liners who view the pyramids as an affront to Islam. There's always some morons out there.
As for Egypt being forgotten without its archaeological sites. Maybe. But it still has control over 1 of the 2 most important waterways on the planet.
to be fair, there are massive differences between the Taliban and the Muslim Brotherhood, even just looking at the societies they come from. The Brotherhood's interpretation of Sharia is nowhere near as strict.
I totally see your point, and its not to say with absolute freedom the Brotherhood wouldn't be against the pyramids or killing people in soccer fields, it would just be a hugely dramatic shift in their MO.
I almost broke my face cringing at Obama saying the US is cancelling joint training operations with Egypt's military because they've killed people and are eroding the rights of citizens. The irony is clearly lost on him of the US military killing more people than any other force on the planet and the US continuously looking for new ways to erode its own and other country's rights.
Originally posted by jaden101
I almost broke my face cringing at Obama saying the US is cancelling joint training operations with Egypt's military because they've killed people and are eroding the rights of citizens. The irony is clearly lost on him of the US military killing more people than any other force on the planet and the US continuously looking for new ways to erode its own and other country's rights.
Originally posted by jaden101
I almost broke my face cringing at Obama saying the US is cancelling joint training operations with Egypt's military because they've killed people and are eroding the rights of citizens.
interesting fact that I never see reported when people are talking about military aid and such with Egypt:
For all that America does give (1 billion), the UAE gives twice that and the Saudis 4 times as much. As symbolic as these gestures are, for the Egyptian military American aid is a drop in the bucket.
I agree about the hypocrisy though, it is amusing in a terrible way.
The problem isn't the concept of democracy. The reason I don't see hypocrisy with the US's position of supporting the coup is that while the US also practices democracy, we only do so with political parties. We make sure to separate religion from state pretty much for this very reason. I think this is the most egregious example of religion vs state seen in the modern era. What happens when an unstoppable force (state) meets an immovable object (religion)? Chaos happens. Chaos that ripples everywhere.