Things vs People (Zero Anth on the AAA & Egypt)

Max Forte on the recent response of the AAA to events in Egypt:

In a first-rate public exercise of missing the point, the American Anthropological Association released a statement on 02 February, in conjunction with the Archaeological Institute of America, misleadingly titled “Statement of Support for Egypt.” After getting past the brief formality of noting that Egyptian lives and rights are being trampled upon, the statement goes on to focus on the fate of the artifacts housed at the Museum of Egyptian Antiquities–visited by countless tourists, and a specialized class of tourists known as archaeologists. Self-interest, anyone? Indeed, the statement is 190 words, of which at most 31 are devoted to Egyptian lives and rights, and 150 are devoted to the blessed artifacts.

Read the rest here, then sit back and ponder the meaning of anthropology.

Media/Anthropology: Selected bookmarks (Egypt & Tunisia)

John Postill over at media/anthropology has a great new post that lists some key articles, commentaries, and discussions that trace the development of the uprisings in Egypt and Tunisia over the last month or so. Many of them focus on the role that media has played in all of these events, which is an important issue to discuss (some people assume that technology is the driving force behind these social movements, but there is good reason to rethink that position a bit). Anyway, here is one of my favorite quotes listed:

“Egyptians aren’t demonstrating for an Islamic government any more than the Tunisians were; they’re demonstrating for an honest government – one that will improve education and infrastructure, reduce poverty and inflation, end the Emergency Law, stop torturing people in police stations, stop doing the bidding of the US and Israel in Palestine, stop rigging elections, and, above all, stop lying to them.”

– Adam Shatz, London Review of Books Blog

Read the rest of John's post, here.

Democracy or Extremism? Political Ideals and Egypt

The US has a pretty confusing--if not outright contradictory--history of foreign policy. On the surface, we supposedly are the champions of democracy, human rights, and freedom. Right? Those are the ideals that the nation was founded upon, and they continue to play a primary role in the political rhetoric and overall idealism of its people.

However, the US also has a history of making alliances with autocratic regimes and/or dictatorships that serve particular short-term interests (Somoza, Pinochet, the Shah of Iran, the Saudi regime, and of course Mubarak in Egypt). These alliances, while politically expedient, haven't exactly lead to the greatest results--and the histories of Latin America, to name one regional example, speak quite clearly to that. Such decisions also stand in pretty stark contrast to our supposed ideals about governance and freedom.

Anyway, what's somewhat disturbing and shocking is the sheer number of people calling for the continued support of the Mubarak regime, which is a continuation of the same kind of international policy that we have relied upon for far too long. What's this all about? Fear? A belief in the whole "clash of the civilizations" scheme that old Sam Huntington used to peddle? Why have so many politicians, pundits, and citizens of the US (and the west in general) been so hesitant, so wary about the events in Egypt? Are their worries grounded, or are these folks overreacting a bit? And what about all of those American ideals about democracy, human rights, and political freedom?

Enough questions, how about some more Zizek:

Zizek on events in Egypt

Slavoj Zizek on revolution, the west, Egypt, and fear:

What cannot but strike the eye in the revolts in Tunisia and Egypt is the conspicuous absence of Muslim fundamentalism. In the best secular democratic tradition, people simply revolted against an oppressive regime, its corruption and poverty, and demanded freedom and economic hope. The cynical wisdom of western liberals, according to which, in Arab countries, genuine democratic sense is limited to narrow liberal elites while the vast majority can only be mobilised through religious fundamentalism or nationalism, has been proven wrong. The big question is what will happen next? Who will emerge as the political winner?

Read the rest here.

Power, realpolitik, and freedom: Egypt and US Ideals about Freedom

What absolutely blows me away is how quickly some folks drop their supposed ideals about freedom and democracy when the people under consideration are far away (like in Egypt, for example). It's shocking, actually, to hear some folks out there calling for the support of Mubarak as a close ally (check the comments section). I don't get it. Democracy, it seems, only applies here at home. When it comes to a distant population like the people of Egypt, it seems that many people are willing to sidestep all of the rhetoric about political freedom and openly advocate supporting a repressive policy state, all in the name of "our interests." Horribly ironic, no? Granted, the situation in Egypt is far from clear, but I definitely do not think that going back to the "support the nearest dictator who will toe the line" model is the way to go. Absolutely not. Anyway, here are some quotes that are apt for folks on all sides of the political spectrum here in the US:

Concentrated power has always been the enemy of liberty.

-Ronald Reagan

Democracy is worth dying for, because it's the most deeply honorable form of government ever devised by man.

-Ronald Reagan

They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety.

-Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790), Letter to Josiah Quincy, Sept. 11, 1773.

A little rebellion now and then is a good thing.

-President Thomas Jefferson.

Those who expect to reap the blessing of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it.

-Thomas Paine.

Spoof on US State Department's Position on Egyptian Protests

Autocrats, democracy, and pragmatism

Over on a political blog that I check every now and again, one of the respondents to this post argues that the US should keep supporting Mubarak (despite that fact that he's a SOB), and that they would be perfectly content if the conditions of the last 30 years continued unabated. This is one strain of realpolitik that has been pretty common in certain circles the last few days, one that is akin to a long-running foreign policy philosophy that has reigned in the US for decades.

I completely disagree with this sort of thinking, for numerous reasons. Mubarak is a crucial part of the problem, and is helping to create conditions that will only make things worse in the long run. Brutal repression doesn't lead anywhere good, and there are plenty of historical examples that bear this out. Seems pretty self explanatory, really. Repressive regimes are rampant throughout the region, and Egypt is just another case in point. These governments only fuel inequality, repression, poverty, and violence. Why is it that we think that supporting an autocratic regime--which represses the rights of its citizens--is in any way an acceptable solution?

In the long run, supporting anti-democratic regimes only undermines US legitimacy and credibility, especially considering all of our talk about freedom, democracy, and liberty. History has PLENTY of examples that bear this out (Somoza was "our bastard" in Central America, and that worked out just wonderfully, didn't it?). But then, maybe all of that talk about freedom and democracy is just a bunch of rhetoric and political theater. That's the pessimistic version of this particular trend.

Eventually, these types of alliances always come back to haunt us--and Egypt could be yet another case. Considering the fact that we have tacitly supported Mubarak for three decades, there is no reason to assume that a new government will necessarily look upon the US with favor. This is a real problem...but nobody should really be shocked, all things considered. Thirty years is a long time.

I definitely agree with anyone who is skeptical about where events in Egypt are heading. Definitely. It's difficult to tell at this point what will happen, and anyone who claims otherwise is being way too naive. This can go many ways, so it makes sense to step back and avoid making unsubstantiated proclamations. Maybe it's a good time for guarded optimism--maybe this will result in democratic change in Egypt. That said, it also makes sense to revisit some of our basic foreign policy philosophies of the past 50 years, and maybe rethink some of the short-term political compromises that the US has been willing to make--instead of falling back on the same old "let's keep the autocrat in place" thinking. What this means to me is that maybe, just maybe, it's best NOT to side with the dictator. A crazy idea, I know.

It's ironic, considering the foundations of this nation, that today so many politicians (and citizens) are willing to aid and support dictators in the name of our supposed "interests." To me, that's just short-term thinking at its finest (and it also flies completely in the face of our supposed ideals and basic beliefs--not that humans aren't always full of contradictions). Seems like we would have learned our lesson by now. Maybe we need to reassess what we mean when we talk about "our interests," all things considered. I am especially surprised when hardcore self-identified proponents of liberty and democracy so quickly backtrack from their ideals when the population under question exists outside certain political and social boundaries. Apparently, it's "democracy for me and not for thee," all in the name of political pragmatism.

I wrote this on another thread, but I'll repeat it here: there is no way that any US citizen in their right mind would argue that we need to support an autocratic regime in the name of political pragmatism HERE, so why is this an acceptable solution over THERE? Short answer: it's not.

/political rant for the day.

Events in Egypt (everything is fine love the egypt government)

Along with tons of others out there, I have spent a good part of the last 24 hours watching AJE's live coverage of the events in Egypt, and reading all of the reports and posts about these events. The Guardian UK also has a page with live updates, here. Max Forte has a new post over at Zero Anthropology: "Focus on Egypt." Daily Kos has an open thread going right now, as well as a large collection of posts, reactions, thoughts, and links about the protests. Twitter has also played an interesting role in spreading news about these events through a series of topics and tags (ie #Jan25; #Egypt, etc).

Above: screen shot of a popular tweet that has been all over twitter the last few days.

As numerous people have already pointed out, social media has played a key role in all of this (but it's also important to realize that what is happening extends beyond these forms of media). This short BBC video talks about "Protests and the role of social media." Max Forte (in the post that I already linked to above) has also highlighted the role of blogs in these protests:

"Egypt’s bloggers are playing an increasingly important role in broadening the scope of acceptable political and social discourse, and self-expression,” and Egyptian bloggers work as human rights activists, although this has been diminished by various government crackdowns and the turn to other social media, such as Facebook and Twitter. While usually targeting the Muslim Brotherhood, the government “has also used the Emergency Law in some recent cases to target bloggers and labor demonstrators.

One of the most blatant moves of the Egyptian government was the decision to close down social media (internet access, cell phone use, etc) to attempt to control popular unrest. Not a good decision--and this speaks to the power of these tools when it comes to political organization and expression. Of course, this whole story is developing as we speak, so it remains to be seen how things will play out. More about this later on.

UPDATE:

There are tons of media depictions of the unfolding events in Egypt--videos, reports, photos, images, tweets, blog posts, etc. Sites like YouTube are flooded with all sorts of footage, shot by media professionals and people with cell phones. Social media is certainly playing an undeniable role in all of this--and there are endless examples out there that provide unique insights into how actions, thoughts, sentiments and ideas are being communicated. Pretty fascinating stuff. Here's just one of many:

UPDATE II:

Barbara Miller at anthropologyworks posted "Understanding Egypt," which has a ton of good references for anyone looking to learn more about "culture, society, and contemporary change" in Egypt.