"The social division in Egypt was made clear by the breakdown of the votes. In Cairo, by far Egypt's biggest urban centre, the constitution was opposed by 57 per cent to 43 per cent, according to the Brotherhood's own figures. However, the "yes" campaign won by proportionally much larger majorities in less populated but more conservative areas of Upper Egypt and the Sinai. This urban-rural split has played into the deeply divisive propaganda of both sides. Opposition figures and newspaper editors allege that the Brotherhood relies for support on a less well-educated, more narrow-minded base easily manipulated by local clerics, while Islamists claim the "no" vote is led by a corrupt and wealthy elite, often with ties to the old regime, out of touch with the "real Egypt". " The Telegraph
------------------------------------
Even in relatively "modern" Cairo nearly half of voters cast their ballots in favor of Mursi's political Islam as a basis for running Egyptians' lives. Outside the capital the MB/salafi written constitution carried the day everywhere. Can we doubt that this will not be repeated in the next round of voting.
Once the new constitution becomes the law of the land there will be a gradual process of abrogation of human rights as Egypt becomes a country much like Iran. In the end there won't be a dime's worth of difference between Shia Iran and Sunni Egypt.
Christians, modern women, Shia (there are a few), secularists, all these should look to their exit routes.
The Army? vendu, and likely to remain that way so long as the institution 's autonomy is not threatened.
William Pitt said that the map of Europe could be put away because Bonaparte had prevailed and the map would not be needed.
It will be the same for Egypt. pl
Sounds a bit like certain areas in the U.S. If the Fundies of all flavors representing Christianity had their way, this country would be a Theocracy. Just my personal observation and two cents. I would offer the following as Citation. Recently passed State laws and laws forwarded along Religious lines in the U.S. House. Go to a few Fundie web sites and read their published works. In addition I would recommend "American Theocracy" by Kevin Phillips. I'll go out on a limb and say that a significant percentage of Coptic's would agree with ruling from the Middle Ages, as long as it's their Holy Book used as the template.
Specific to Egypt, it breaks my heart to see any people subjugated to any Theocracy because in my opinion it's just an older form of Mass Mind Control. Once in place, a Theocracy turns everyone else into "the others" and diminishes such people to "less than". I agree that if I were one soon to be defined as "the other" in Egypt, I would be inclined to beat feet towards the border, post-haste. However, the geography does not leave many options for people not financially able to hop a flight. The thinking behind Jefferson's letters concerning the Baptist in Conn. come to mind.
Posted by: agin' cajun | 17 December 2012 at 10:46 AM
They voted for an Islamic government.
They voted for a form of representative government based on Islam.
Years ago, in this forum, I argued that Muslim polities cannot be secular (excepting with bayonets).
And the population craves Islamic piety.
This is not Middle Ages; the ideas of elections, separation of powers, military subject to civilian rule, representative government have been accepted and grafted - albeit inorganically - to the ideas of Islam.
And Middle Ages were not Dark Ages in Europe; read Clagett on history of the science of mechanics in the Middle Ages, Glison on Medieval Philosophy, and Strayer on the Medieval Origins of the Modern State.
I agree that public social space for Europeanized Muslims has shrunk and will continue to shrink.
The key item for me, however, is the extent to which meaningful elections and orderly changes of government takes place in Egypt.
For that, we have to wait and see and hope for the best.
Posted by: Bababk Makkinejad | 17 December 2012 at 11:26 AM
What foreign nation-state has the most influence on Egypt currently? If any and why? For better or worse?
Posted by: William R. Cumming | 17 December 2012 at 12:56 PM
I hope the Russians will start arming the Copts. PC West will not dare. I miss the 19th Century.
Posted by: trooper | 17 December 2012 at 02:08 PM
An Islamist state in control of the Suez Canal. Haven't we been through something like this before?
WTF were those idiots in Washington thinking?
Col. Lang, how difficult would it be for Israel, with out assistance, to retake the Sinai and a Twenty mile buffer to the West of the canal?
Posted by: walrus | 17 December 2012 at 02:47 PM
walrus
I don't think they are up to big ground operations any longer. they would rather concentrate on HB rockets and the like. pl
Posted by: turcopolier | 17 December 2012 at 03:15 PM
And pray tell me where would these Arab Christians - these "Darkies" - go?
To USA?
To Russia?
Or to the EU states?
Posted by: Bababk Makkinejad | 17 December 2012 at 03:25 PM
I do not think it is a big deal that an "Islamist" government control the Suez Canal; anymore than when Nasser was in power.
So Israelis take over Sinai; and then what?
Posted by: Bababk Makkinejad | 17 December 2012 at 03:27 PM
USA
Posted by: Bababk Makkinejad | 17 December 2012 at 03:27 PM
I was thinking coup. Gotta think big. It worked for the Alawites for decades. And the Mughals. And the criollos in Bolivia. Etc. Russians just need to get them the right weapons, training can be done in Cyprus.
Posted by: trooper | 17 December 2012 at 03:56 PM
Irak-Afghanistan-Lebanon redux. they will need another Operation Nickel Grass to save their axxes.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Nickel_Grass
Posted by: Will | 17 December 2012 at 05:29 PM
They voted themselves back into the middle ages whereas we bomb them back into the middle ages.
Posted by: AntoineArdonne | 17 December 2012 at 07:30 PM