Egyptian Revolution took place in a way depicted by Hegel saying everything happens repeatedly in the world, remembering that leaving of Mubarak took place in the same day as the Iranian Revolution took place 32 years ago. Though Marx has added to this word of Hegel that “yes, but what happens in the first stance is tragedy is tragic-comedy at the second stance, the perception of comedy and tragedy changes depending on where one looks from.
From the very first day it was clear that Mubarek would not be able to remain in power any more. Even the USA who supported him from the outset understood that his dictatorship is not sustainable from the 2nd and 3rd day of the protests by the public pouring down to the Tahrir Square and she declared that the Mubarek reign came to an end for her by adding “immediately” to the second statement as an addition to her first advisory statement regarding the transformation.
This declaration didn’t come to any meaning for the USA other than a search for the sustainability of Mubarek’s regime, with a more concrete phrase the Camp David contexture. It is not possible to discern to what extent she will be able to accomplish it form now on. But at least it can be said that she reflexes to minimize her loss. Therefore, her calling upon Mubarek to leave doesn’t mean that she was behind the revolution from the beginning, even conversely it was a consequence of a search and expectation of minimizing her loss at the end of the revolution which has become an inevitable fact.
The fact that everyone and the USA understood in two days and that Mubarek barely got in 18 days should be interpreted as the blindfolding impact of greed for potency in human nature. The potency of 30 years didn’t suffice a dictator. Conversely, human being’s considering himself as a god and day by day losing his reason is a more accustomed situation of course. Egypt is a place where the Pharaohs got fierce as to say to their public “I am your greatest god” and where they searched for a way to impose themselves on people not only during their life time but even after their death via their shadows and chenopods.
However, Egypt is also a place that witnessed the source of ignorance behind these godly claims and the tragic-comic situation in which the fierce rulers fall many times. There are priceless exemplary stages in each of these instances regarding the human nature and dimension of evil that human beings committed against one another. Indeed, it is a real exemplary that a wise community, thirst for its freedom, has been ruled by those who blindfolded in their ignorance.
There is a significant role of Hamans or Bel’ams who cooperated with these dictators and preferred to sell their knowledge and wisdom with a miniscule price in this situation as well. The Pharaoh doesn’t only blindfold in his ignorance, but also these kinds of figures and the eyeglasses that his foreign supporters and Western allies put on his eyes blindfolded his vision.
We should underline the fact that in this context an important concern of the West who has recited the underdevelopment of democracy in Islamic world by keeping a tight rein on Muslims, is the possibility of Islamist’s or Ihkwan’s coming to power or gaining power as a result of these public movements in Tunisia, Egypt and likely to pass to other countries as well. In fact, the significant support which sustained these dictators in power that long again came from the West. The only rationale behind this support was preventing Muslims from coming to power which a democratic process wouldn’t desire.
Hence, there has always been a hypocrite side of the discourses cultivating the conflict between Islam and democracy. Today particularly in Egypt, the Muslim Brotherhood doesn’t have a demand of “bringing the Shari’a” more than those, so called, on the stage. The statement that spokesman of the Ikhwan Dr. Eşref Abdülgaffar uttered as a response to the question whether they would have some religious demand or not unveils the mystery of the case. He says “we will suffice with what we already have. The things available in the old laws are enough for us. Our demands are totally national. They are national demands we don’t have any demands regarding religion. We want to change the laws that Husnu Mubarek changed to sustain his potency. They manipulate on the constitution in order to realize their plans. We don’t want to change the constitution totally; we want the basic articles to remain as such.”
Therefore, I hope that the demands of Islamist politics from Tunisia, to Egypt; from Yemen to Algeria which bases on the discourse of more democracy, human rights, rule of law, fair distribution of resources and transparency of the administration instead of more religiosity will be evaluated in a more pertinent way. This dimension of the Islamist politics will foreground more than the mediatic or academic perceptions sentencing it via clichés such as “hand chopping” or “abasing of women.”
The revolution is accomplished in Egypt.
People revolutionized the regime which was imposed on them with oppression, bribery and fraud. After the patience and decisiveness of 18 days which as if lasted for 18 years the public has become the willpower which establish the state and from then on no power can hold it off the equation that will establish a new regime.
The revolution began in the heart of people before all. They have been girded with a strong belief that they can change their fate. The only thing remained is to change the world which is the easiest thing from now on.