Just thought to discuss one aspect of the Egyptian situation with Pat and all the friends here as in fact media reports in the US are getting way much better than earlier in reporting the day to day events. Yet, there is an obvious failure in discussing where these events lead, or the trends that emerge to create a new dynamism in Egypt and the region.
We all know by now that the MBs will win the day in the new parliament followed by the NDP. The question now is : then what?. The main concern of the Egyptians is the economic situation. Their victory in the 25th of January lifted expectations to an unrealistic level. This brings a sense of empowerment and a lack of patience.
On one hand, we have the Islamists who really do not have any economic plan other than returning to what was happening under Mubarak minus the flagrant corruption (to a certain degree). This pattern of economic “development” does not develop anything. In the best case scenario the MBs will be unable to deliver fast enough and in the worst case they will not deliver at all.
With the youth who found their road to the main squares in Egyptian cities we might be in for a prolonged period of instability. Those who say that the instability is a result of the fall of Mubarak are simply wrong because his regime was unsustainable anyway. The question then is the question now : if the Egyptians do not find soon enough a convincing path to real development we will be back to square one.
If such a path does not yield results fast enough it should at least be convincing to the majority of the population that it will eventually change the horrifying unemployment figures (the real ones). It does not seem likely that either of these things will happen. That being so, we will witness a couple of years of relative and uneasy calm at best.
Other issues that really need to be discussed is the relative gain of weight of the periphery countries surrounding the region as a result of the relative weakening of the “Arab World” – (God knows how I dislike this term). Also there are growing prospect of Shia unrest in the Gulf. Could it be the following wave?. But it is safer to remain in Egypt for now. Sorry for not writing more often. Yusuf al-Misry
-------------------------------
I have said from the beginning that Egypt's main problem is economic and cultural, not political. It is not a matter of personalities. Egyptians just have too many children for the size of the national economic product. pl
Personally I believe the endemic corruption in Egypt will now almost guarantee the struggle is only over who or what groups are free to exploit the Egyptian masses and economy for their own purposes, not for the greater good of all Egyptians. Endemic corruption like that in USA is very very difficult to end from within the system.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 29 November 2011 at 07:47 PM
WRC
Corruption is a minor issue. Economic insufficiency is what kills Egypt. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 29 November 2011 at 07:53 PM
Just as corruption helped kill Byzantium corruption cannot be separated from economics. Just try a little ADAM SMITH and DAVID HUME, 18th Century Scots who supported capitalism even while recognizing that corruption could undermine and even end it.
Does the luck of the draw on oil also impact Egypt? Is there any doubt that corruption is one of the principle drivers on the Arab Spring? OWS? USA failures in Iraq and Afghanistan?
A new report tries to paint the TEA PARTY as similar to the KKK wherein I believe corruption is the TEA PARTY driver just most of the candidates cannot say so because of their own corrupt activities or support by those who benefit from USA corruption. Should corruption be an issue in national elections? I think so.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 30 November 2011 at 02:10 AM
WRC
"Corruption" whatever it is that you mean by that, played no role that I am aware of in the decline of Byzantium over a millennium during which there were several massive revivals of power and territorial extent. Byzantium (the eastern Roman Empire) lasted five times as long as the US has to this point, so what are you talking abut? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 30 November 2011 at 09:13 AM
Most major histories of Byzantium conclude that its collapse was internal due to corruption and while Turkish cannon ended the day for that Empire it in fact died long before.
Some also conclude that the adoption of Christianity by Constantine as the state religion was also another reason for its collapse although as PL states it did last a long long time. Perhaps the most understudied Empire in history as the 2nd Rome.
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 30 November 2011 at 09:48 AM
wrc
What does "corruption" in the Byzantine context mean? I can provide you citations that will state that the loss of anatolia first to the Seljuks and the to the Ottomans doomed Byantium by depriving the empire of its major military recruiting areas and much of its population. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 30 November 2011 at 09:56 AM
I understand that the utter devastation wrought by the Latins during the 4th crusade didn't really help either.
Posted by: toto | 30 November 2011 at 10:48 AM
Military defeats and reduction of territory definitely major factors. But corruption came first. IMO!
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 30 November 2011 at 10:54 AM
One of the big problems is military control of the economy: "As much as one-third of Egypt’s economy is under military control...What sets apart the Egyptian military, the Arab world’s largest, is that its companies also offer an array of products or services in the domestic consumer economy – and without any civilian oversight."
http://www.iol.co.za/business/business-news/one-third-of-egypt-s-economy-under-army-control-1.1029129
Besides that, military elites receive enormous amounts of American largess.
The Egyptian military isn't going to give up its enormous perks and privileges without a huge fight.
Funny that Washington elites don't complain about all that gov-vomit ownership!
Posted by: JohnH | 30 November 2011 at 10:57 AM
wrc
You didn't answer me as to what "corruption" would be in the Byzantine absolute monarchy. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 30 November 2011 at 11:33 AM
1. My understanding is that Bureaucracy killed Byzantium.
2. Economic insufficiency and corruption are inextricably linked. Francis Fukuyama explained why this is so in his epic "Trust - the economic value of trust and cooperation".
You cannot start as an entrepreneur, innovator or business builder (ie job creator) if you know that once you turn a profit, some slimy bastard is going to turn up and demand their twenty percent to let you continue to exist.
If the MB can deliver a less corrupt business environment, human nature will ensure that the Egyptian economy thrives.
Posted by: walrus | 30 November 2011 at 02:25 PM
walrus
i sam still waiting for an explanation of how "corruption" worked in medieval Byzantium.
entrepreneurialial businesses worked to great profit in the "bakhshish' ridden world of the Middle East for millennia. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 30 November 2011 at 03:17 PM
I use the word "corruption" to mean self-dealing by elites whatever the impacts short or long term on the rest of the society they are a part of. The "rentier" class also grew larger with each year of the empire and was largely untaxed even while manufacturing and other sinews of business collapsed.
What year did Istanbul fall? 1469? Did plague also weaken that empire?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 30 November 2011 at 03:52 PM
WRC
There is more to any society than money.
Posted by: Fred | 30 November 2011 at 04:24 PM
WRC
You have a unique definition of "corruption." "Self Dealing?" what the hell is capitalism? your view is incredibly romantic. No economy can overcome the Malthusian effects of unlimited population growth. Once again, Mubarak and company did not make Egyptians fellahiin poor. they made thenmselves poor by unlimited f-----g without any thought of the consequences. Any new egyptian government will face the same problem. BTW, how much "stolen" Husni Mubarak money have the "hounds" found? pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 30 November 2011 at 06:54 PM
Could we substitute "tribute" in its various
definitions for "corruption"?
Posted by: steve g | 30 November 2011 at 07:52 PM