toxic.zen Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 the story seems to be still developing but apparently after refusing to step down he is no longer in power... if this really pans out, then I am really impressed! this was a relatively nonviolent revolution! its good to see this as a possibility! http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_egypt http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/ml_egypt 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Reminds me a bit of the "People Power" revolution that swept Ferdinand Marcos out of office and replaced him with Corazon Aquino in 1986. Not that much was really changed... Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Oh, Michael, you jaded, jaded person. But in all seriousness, for the good or the bad, these revolutions proved a thing I always thought: fear to act is an oppressed people's greatest obstacle, because, if the commonfolk unites there is nothing that can stop it. That's why a revolution started others: the arab peoples simply saw how simple it is (in relative terms, of course) to attack an old, bloated regime. It's more like solidarnošč, I think... only really organized hardliners could try to stop communism from its headfirst fall on the ground. And so it is today! But all remains to be seen and, yes, reality may crash the party as per usual. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Yeah, control went to the army. yay. I mean, would you be happy with this outcome if you cared about democracy or transparent processes of gummint? An opposition that has sat it out for the last thirty years is unlikey to be able to form any sort of functioning cabal, reinstalling the present gummint is unpalatable to the "I confuse emotions with thoughts" mob informed by the world press: the military has the game stitched up. What a **** up. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 What gets my goat is the claptrap of the virtues of democracy and people getting choice - so like the UK invading Iraq? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 Yeah, control went to the army. yay. I mean, would you be happy with this outcome if you cared about democracy or transparent processes of gummint? An opposition that has sat it out for the last thirty years is unlikey to be able to form any sort of functioning cabal, reinstalling the present gummint is unpalatable to the "I confuse emotions with thoughts" mob informed by the world press: the military has the game stitched up. What a **** up. The army is a relatively honest broker in Egypt and enjoys the confidence of the people. The big news really is the supension of the state of emergency that has been used by the government for the last 30 years to bypass the rule of law. The opposition hasn't 'sat it out' through choice either, since the emergency laws effectively forbid certain types of party and candidates. The real issue here though is that whoever gets the power has still got a basket of **** to deal with: a hugely overpopulated and impoverished nation with a very narrow and weak economy. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 12, 2011 Share Posted February 12, 2011 So, no light at the end of the $hitstorm tunnel? Anybody? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 So, no light at the end of the $hitstorm tunnel? Anybody? Egypt enjoys the position of sitting on one of the major strategic sea routes in the world - it can't just be let go to do it's own thing. Stability is the requirement - something they had with Mubarak until the recent hikes in food prices. Aff, I was being kind and imagining that Egypt had a functional opposition party. It doesn't, that's the result of having a dictatorship in place for the last thirty years. What we saw was Mubarak being sacrificed to placate the mob and buy time. Sure he was corrupt, but he held the Middle East in relative stability with the support of the US (and Israel) - something that isn't easy to do. On the plus side: CMSF:The Suez will provide some stunning backdrops to the action. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 13, 2011 Share Posted February 13, 2011 What we saw was Mubarak being sacrificed to placate the mob and buy time. Which was my point earlier. What we see time and again—and it has become depressingly true in this country as well—is that the more things change, the more they stay the same. To some extent, there is not much change, and usually no improvement, in fundamental conditions because those are not under rational control by human agencies. And to the extent that they are controlled by human agency, that control is not rationally exercised for the benefit of the long term interests of a majority of the people. In short, it is all too possible that matters will get steadily if gradually worse until a major cataclysm occurs, when matters will suddenly get a whole lot worse. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 In short, it is all too possible that matters will get steadily if gradually worse until a major cataclysm occurs, when matters will suddenly get a whole lot worse. Michael Did you feel that way about Egypt when you were standing there on the beach watching the Red Sea consume Pharaoh's army? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Yes, yes, I had a foreboding that it would only be a matter of time before we would all be back doing it all over again. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 So, the people here support the "trusted, old dictatorship for the sake of stability" argument? With no exceptions? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 No, Mubarak is an old man and it is doubtful that he would have been good for much any longer. Just don't count on the change to bring about paradise on earth. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 Oh, god, no. Western democracies that have existed for 50, 100 or more years still have their own brand of trouble, so nobody thinks that. But a nation does need a startup on democracy. How could one become good at something one's never done? Right? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Affentitten Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 So, the people here support the "trusted, old dictatorship for the sake of stability" argument? With no exceptions? My posts didn't say that. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 I didn't see your post, sorry! 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 14, 2011 Share Posted February 14, 2011 According to experts, the fortune amassed by Egypt’s former president and his two sons (both billionaires) could reach $70 billion. That includes funds in secret offshore bank accounts and investments in residences and real-estate properties reaching from Rodeo Drive in Beverley Hills to Wilton Place in central London and Egypt’s Sharm el-Sheik tourist resort. ...... http://www.alternet.org/story/149901/how_hosni_mubarak_became_one_of_the_richest_men_in_the_world_on_our_dime from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/feb/04/hosni-mubarak-family-fortune 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Oh, god, no. Western democracies that have existed for 50, 100 or more years still have their own brand of trouble, so nobody thinks that. But a nation does need a startup on democracy. How could one become good at something one's never done? Right? Plus you need to realize that democracy as it is known in the West is not a branch that can be grafted onto just any tree. It works as it does in the West because it has grown out of centuries of political evolution in cultures with certain biases. Much of the world has had a very different history with other cultural biases. Other nations will have different takes on the idea which will strain the whole concept of democracy. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Michael has it right there. Read Churchill's "History of the English Speaking Peoples" for a good, concise account of the processes running before and in conjunction with the adoption of democracy in the west. Mostly it's about gradual change and a long term view. As far as stability goes, I'd say that now would be a good time to be hoping for anything but instability. The meaning of "revolution" is "makes a full circle" - I suspect it found it's usage as a discription for the overthrow of a government to have been coined by someone with a fairly dark sense of humour. Being good at doing something you've never done? Every child manages this process, I don't see that it needs to be impossible to do with human institutions of government. A predictable future makes it a lot easier to plan long term and lets the investment in the change needed return value to the commitment of capital: it would seem that our current leadership is incapable of implementing the changes necessary, or having a clue about which changes are necessary, or even of seeing that there will be a large set of difficult problems to solve in the future. No, I diminish their true value with the last: it must seem like there is no place where there are no problems to solve, present or future. It's just that the hopelessness they feel and the incompetence they display is imperfectly emulated by their constituency. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Being good at doing something you've never done? Every child manages this process, I don't see that it needs to be impossible to do with human institutions of government. I just meant, it would be a bit naive to expect a flawless, smooth process immediately. Trial and error is required. At least, if you don't forcefully remove every public official that has ever been corrupted, and sit all the voting population through an extensive seminar on how stuff is done properly. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dieseltaylor Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 What democracy were you thinking of as a role model? Singapore? Switzerland, Denmark? 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pešadija Posted February 15, 2011 Share Posted February 15, 2011 Well, as an admirer of all things northern, I'd be tempted to say anything German or more austral... ;P But seriously, reasoning in molds is not of help here. At least, that's my debatable opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 Thinking in moulds isn't helpful, no, but neither is ignoring historical data sets. Most often a government regresses on a revolution, we might be a bit worried about what sort of regression we're looking at here. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Emrys Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 ...and sit all the voting population through an extensive seminar on how stuff is done properly. Even that wouldn't do it. Most of the time people do what they damn well please, or some mixture of what they've been told to do and what they can get away with. Old habits die hard, and cultural traditions the hardest of all. Michael 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
costard Posted February 16, 2011 Share Posted February 16, 2011 I just meant' date=' it would be a bit naive to expect a flawless, smooth process immediately. Trial and error is required. At least, if you don't forcefully remove every public official that has ever been corrupted, and sit all the voting population through an extensive seminar on how stuff is done properly. [/quote'] You have that right - and given the level of competence generally available to the human race.... I think the big, the really big problem being faced by these countries (Egypt, Tunisia, now Bahrain) is that the rule of law has met the point where the populace is finding itself unable to feed itself. "You can take my car, my house, my job, but when you take food from the mouths of my children, you cannot expect me not to fight." How is it that these people can suddenly no longer afford to feed themselves? Well, for a start, most of them try to make ends meet on less than $2 a day. The movement of money from the US Treasury, through the Federal Reserve to the market has resulted in the flight of that money away from the place where it's wanted, (apparently US Treasury bonds at some dismal price, perhaps kept there for 50 or a hundred years) towards other asset classes. Equities are bouncing along the top at the moment: the price to earnings ratios (particularly due to the sudden loss of market participation that occurred with the '08 crash) have hit the point where more money can be made, for less risk, in gold, silver, copper - commodities. Thanks in large part to the largess of the Fed and its nincompoop masters, the amount of money in the market (the number of fiat US dollars) is now such that these commodities have hit their limit and the money has now moved to being put into soft commodities: food and fibre. The markets for these are vast - something like 60% of the global economy. When these commodities are subject to the same price manipulations as, say, silver or oil, you get the basic injustice of theft and fraud transmitting itself from the upper echelons of the society to the lower - everyone knows it is happening, noone can deny that there is a miscarriage of justice (if they're capable of making true statements, of course). The rule of law has been demonstrated to be a sham, there is no longer an obligation on the part of the populace to agree to abide by the dictates of the state. In fact, for them to do so is in effect to invite their own deaths. The banks and trading houses of Wall Street own no moral sense (though they claim to be individuals under the US constitution as far as voting law is concerned) - they own lots and lots of paper (paid for with taxpayer money, mind you). This paper requires them to meet promises made, i.e. we have "trust me" coming from the mouths of Goldman Sachs, JP Morgan, BOA, the US legislature..., and doesn't necessarily mean anything when the relationship to reality is plumbed by enquiring minds (do a google search for silver and contango). It really isn't looking good, in my opinion. 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.