BS: Egypt?

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:01 PM

Richard.
Remember I started this thread to try to find out what was driving the people's opposition to the Morsi regime - and the answer appears still to be more than somewhat unspecific,

The piece Bobad just linked to is quite specific.
Most Egyptians do not want Islamism, as I said in the second post on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:03 PM

Sorry.

Richard said,
"Remember I started this thread to try to find out what was driving the people's opposition to the Morsi regime - and the answer appears still to be more than somewhat unspecific,"

The piece Bobad just linked to is quite specific.
Most Egyptians do not want Islamism, as I said in the second post on this thread.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 03:25 PM

"Most Egyptians don't want Islamism."

That's not totally clear. What is clear is that a great number of Egyptians, especially in cities, don' want Islamism. It's also clear that when it came to an election, the party associated with Islamism won.

It'd be nice if the wrong people didn't win elections, but only too often that happens. Sometimes very much the wrong people, who set about making quite sure there's no chance of their getting vot out in future elections. (I'm not saying that's necessarily what happened this time, but it can and does happen.)

So the problem arises, how should people cope with that?

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 13 Jul 13 - 04:11 PM

The election was close and the secular vote was split.
Morsi did not have a mandate for the Islamisation of the country.
People felt that their democracy was being subverted.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 12:02 PM

The notion of 'mandate' is very suspect. Governments do what they can get away woth. They fail to do things they promised to do, they do things they promised not to do, they stick policies in the small print, and then say people voted fr those policies and it. Gives them 'a mandate'.

In the case of Egypt it's not at all clear what majority opinion is.   Clealy there are enormous numbers of peoe who opposed Morsi, and enormous numbers who oppose the generals. It appears that these include many who backed Morsi but also many who see the coup as an attack on democracy, even if they didn't like Morsi.

What seems evident to me is that without some kind of provision for popular 'recall' in between elections when a government is grossly out of tune with the mass of ordinary people, a system of representative democracy is very much at risk. Of course while this might help in cases where a repressive government as actually unpopular - it does nothing to meet the situation where there is majority support for tyranny.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 03:33 PM

As usual Keith you rely on rumour and hearsay. Whether this is due to ignorance or malice I do not know, although I suspect the latter.

McGrath's post of 0804 mudcat time on the 12th July is cogent (as usual) but thereafter the waters are muddied by a failure clearly to distinguish between Islam and Islamism. I am opposed to theocracies, but if people want to believe in imaginary friends that is a different matter so long as they do not thereby oppress others who are not equally fantasists.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 04:01 PM

There isn't always a clear distinction between Islam and certain kinds of Islamism. Islam, like Christianity (and unlike Judaism) are proselytising religions. In principle they are committed to bring outsiders into the fold, and ideally would wish a world in which everyone was inside.

To some extent most Christian traditions tend to draw a line between secular authority and religion, in line with the injunction "render unto Caesar those things which are Caesars". And there aren't too many firm rules about the trivia of life laid down n the New Testament. The Islamic traditions are a lot more prescriptive about The Law, in a direct echo of its Abrahamic parent, Judaism, but unlike Judaism, having in principle a universal application rather than a limited ethnic one.

In practice most Muslims, like most Christians have accomdated, at least in many countries, to a world in which they liive alongside other religious traditions. But there is a tension, and those we call Islamists are not a separate tradition, but stand at one end of a spectrum.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 14 Jul 13 - 05:19 PM

Richard, just identify any mere rumour or hearsay in a post of mine, and I will withdraw it at once.
In your own time Richard.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 03:20 AM

No "malice" Richard.
I do not believe I have posted out of "ignorance" either.
Please give an example.

The Guardian, Patrick Kingsley. 1st July.
"The scene at the headquarters was a microcosm of the extreme polarisation affecting Egyptian society, which is divided between those who may be religious, but do not seek an Islamic state – and Islamists like the Brotherhood, which seeks to use the concepts of Islamic law to govern Egypt."

So, the opposition do not want Islamism, or is Kingsley also an ignorant, malicious, purveyor of "rumour and hearsay" ?

They may or may not be an absolute majority, otherwise my reply to your OP was accurate.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Joe Offer
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 03:48 AM

Richard Bridge, please be aware that the "imaginary friend" shit, no matter how you cloak it, is offensive; and might cause some people consider you to be a bigot.

-Joe Offer-

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:12 AM

I oppose all theocracies Joe.

Keith, "Islamist" where you there cite is sloppy writing. If you want to know more about Kingsley's views try a fuller article here -

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/apr/02/who-are-the-muslim-brotherhood

It clearly sets out that there is a difference between the Islamic Brotherhood on the one hand and the FJP on the other (think IRA and Sinn Fein if you will) and also that there are fundamentalists and gradualists in the Brotherhood.

It seems to suggest to me that there were considerable doubts that Morsi was aiming to make Egypt the new Iran.

You see, that's part of the point - you write as if to you all Muslims are Islamists.

You might also benefit from looking up what "hearsay" was.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:30 AM

I never said "a new Iran."

He gave himself sweeping new powers.
He instituted a new very religious constitution.
He tried to impose (according to Kingsley 1st july) a 10pm closedown in Cairo so the people were ready for morning prayer.

No malice.
No ignorance.
No rumour.
No hearsay.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:38 AM

Sorry. That was Guardian 5th July.
"The toppling of Mohamed Morsi had a hundred causes, many of them wholly peculiar to Egypt. A choice example: Morsi wanted to close all shops at 10pm, so that Egyptians would be fully rested in time for morning prayers. That didn't go down well in famously nocturnal Cairo where, as the New Yorker put it, "there are still traffic jams at 2am and where internet usage peaks at 12.45am"."

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:52 AM

The term "Islamic Brotherhood" is a bit confusing there in a context where Richard is arguing that it is misleading to refer to the Brotherhood as "Islamist". Looking through that piece by Kingsley it appears that he studiously avoids making any conclusions about the extent to which the Brotherhood is "Islamist", but rather presents quotes from a range of sources arguing the point.

The distinction between "Islamic" and "Islamist" is useful, but both terms cover a spectrum of positions, which overlap.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: McGrath of Harlow
Date: 15 Jul 13 - 05:52 AM

The term "Islamic Brotherhood" is a bit confusing there in a context where Richard is arguing that it is misleading to refer to the Brotherhood as "Islamist". Looking through that piece by Kingsley it appears that he studiously avoids making any conclusions about the extent to which the Brotherhood is "Islamist", but rather presents quotes from a range of sources arguing the point.

The distinction between "Islamic" and "Islamist" is useful, but both terms cover a spectrum of positions, which overlap.

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 16 Jul 13 - 07:57 AM

This report tels how even Ismaliya, where the MB has its roots, has turned from them.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-23312478

Subject: RE: BS: Egypt?
From: Keith A of Hertford
Date: 26 Jul 13 - 08:31 AM

BBC today.
Ousted Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi is being held over allegations of links with Palestinian militants Hamas and plotting attacks on jails in the 2011 uprising, it has been announced.

Meanwhile, EU adds Hezbollah to list of terrorist organisations.