![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
Entry tags:
this is not an essay
Watching the news coming out of Egypt this week, I keep being struck by one phrase, over and over again. "30-year rule."
I am a citizen of the United States. I was raised with the idea of a peaceful democracy, where every four years there is a more-or-less orderly transition of government. It is, I suspect, one of the reasons why we tend to take a lot of things we should protest against - because we know, sooner rather than later, we will get a voice in what comes next.
[how well that voice is heard, and the limitations of a majority voice vs a sizable minority voice, are things for another think]
The idea of a government - one leader, specifically - continuing for a decade, or several decades... I am a creature of my upbringing. I cannot think this is a healthy thing.
No matter how perfect a leader at point A, things change. Countries change, worlds change, people change. And the isolation/idolation of long-term leadership seems almost inevitably to lead -- if not to corruption, than certainly to disconnection. And then, near-inevitably, a refusal on the part of the people to be ignored.
If the two conflict, as they will... violence.
And, after so long a rule, a sense of the unknown, the unknowable. If the structure is broken down, where does the new structure come from?
I am, by training and preference, a historian, not a political theorist. I can't comment with specific accuracy on what's going on outside my own political surroundings, and I am hesitant to make comments about someone else's government when my own is hardly perfect. That's not only arrogant, it's rude. But history tells us that revolution - the disorderly change of a political structure -- is an unpredictable beast. Sometimes it leads to a better day, a stronger country, a healthier and vital nation.
Sometimes, it doesn't.
I have no idea what will come out of Egypt - indeed, the entire Middle East, in the immediate future, after this week. Perhaps nothing will change. Perhaps everything will. I hope that it will be healthy change. I hope that it will be peaceful, focused on bettering the lives of the people who birthed it in positive ways, creating a structure that will give them a voice, and a means to express their will, whatever that will might be.
Do I hope that it is also friendly to the western nations? Of course. I am tired of hate, I am tired of war, and I am tired of Us vs Them at a personal and a global level. (I am, I discover to my amusement, that much of an innocent). But I have also seen what happens, historically, when one government attempts to install a "friendly" regime somewhere else. Better to let the people choose.
I wish you good luck, Egypt. Good luck, to all of us.
EtA: Egypt is taken off-line by its government
The NYT updates the situation, as best they can
I am a citizen of the United States. I was raised with the idea of a peaceful democracy, where every four years there is a more-or-less orderly transition of government. It is, I suspect, one of the reasons why we tend to take a lot of things we should protest against - because we know, sooner rather than later, we will get a voice in what comes next.
[how well that voice is heard, and the limitations of a majority voice vs a sizable minority voice, are things for another think]
The idea of a government - one leader, specifically - continuing for a decade, or several decades... I am a creature of my upbringing. I cannot think this is a healthy thing.
No matter how perfect a leader at point A, things change. Countries change, worlds change, people change. And the isolation/idolation of long-term leadership seems almost inevitably to lead -- if not to corruption, than certainly to disconnection. And then, near-inevitably, a refusal on the part of the people to be ignored.
If the two conflict, as they will... violence.
And, after so long a rule, a sense of the unknown, the unknowable. If the structure is broken down, where does the new structure come from?
I am, by training and preference, a historian, not a political theorist. I can't comment with specific accuracy on what's going on outside my own political surroundings, and I am hesitant to make comments about someone else's government when my own is hardly perfect. That's not only arrogant, it's rude. But history tells us that revolution - the disorderly change of a political structure -- is an unpredictable beast. Sometimes it leads to a better day, a stronger country, a healthier and vital nation.
Sometimes, it doesn't.
I have no idea what will come out of Egypt - indeed, the entire Middle East, in the immediate future, after this week. Perhaps nothing will change. Perhaps everything will. I hope that it will be healthy change. I hope that it will be peaceful, focused on bettering the lives of the people who birthed it in positive ways, creating a structure that will give them a voice, and a means to express their will, whatever that will might be.
Do I hope that it is also friendly to the western nations? Of course. I am tired of hate, I am tired of war, and I am tired of Us vs Them at a personal and a global level. (I am, I discover to my amusement, that much of an innocent). But I have also seen what happens, historically, when one government attempts to install a "friendly" regime somewhere else. Better to let the people choose.
I wish you good luck, Egypt. Good luck, to all of us.
EtA: Egypt is taken off-line by its government
The NYT updates the situation, as best they can
no subject
no subject
Maybe. But I am doubtful, based on history in general, and the history of Egypt and the Middle East overall.