There is a wonderful scene in Ferris Bueller’s Day
Off when Ferris, played perfectly by Matthew Broderick, tells
us that he’s missing his class on European Socialism by taking a
day off. But what does that matter? (as he asks). “I’m not a
socialist. I’m not European. I don’t plan to be European.”
(Paraphrasing here.)
I am reminded of John Hughes’ deathless lines as I watch
the breathless, endless coverage of the recent turmoil in Egypt on
TV. I don’t doubt that it’s terribly important. I just don’t see
the story the way it’s being played on TV and here’s
why.
Let’s take it point by point. No matter how this turns
out, it’s not going to be good for America. The people in Cairo,
Alexandria, and Suez demonstrating against Mubarak are not
Jefferson, Madison, and Washington. They are not liberal democrats
and believers in universal human rights. In the final analysis,
they are not going to be pals of the United States or our only
reliable friend in the area, Israel.
Dwight Eisenhower, a genuinely great President, stood up
boldly against Israeli, French, and British seizure of the Suez
Canal in an effort to befriend Egypt. Gamal Abdel Nasser and his
Egyptians responded by kicking us in the teeth every chance they
could. If there has been a fundamental change in the Egyptians’
attitudes towards the U.S., it has been subtle indeed. Maybe too
subtle to be detected.
Yes, indeed, all of these demonstrations are a sign of a
new dawn in the Mideast. But it’s a lot like the old dawn, except
for a thick haze of Iranian smoke. Has no one noticed that in all
of the recent political changes in the Arab states, power going to
persons largely sympathetic to Iran is a constant? Has anyone
noticed how Mohamed ElBaradei endlessly carried water for Iran
about nuclear arms when he was at the UN supposedly trying to stop
nuke proliferation? This is not going to end well for the U.S. and
the air of breathless (that word again, sorry!) expectation from
the newscasters that Egypt and the whole Mideast will turn out to
be like Minnesota simply has no precedent in history.
Next, how is it that hardly anyone is pointing out except
in conservative talk radio that when there was a real democratic
outpouring in the streets of Iran, an attempted revolution against
the dictatorship of the Holocaust-denying, America-hating, nuclear
weapons–seeking Ahmadinejad in Iran, and Iran suppressed it with
gunfire, Barack Obama said not a word. He totally ignored the young
people trying to make Iran into a democracy. (Iran is the one place
in the Mideast besides Israel where there are a lot of pro-American
young people.) He tried to kiss up to Ahmadinejad with the blood of
pro-democracy youth.
But when our (sort of) pal in Egypt, Hosni Mubarak, is
under siege, Obama treats him like a whipping boy. This is the
classic liberal ploy of appeasing our enemies and snubbing our
friends. It is foolish and does not look nice. It says very bad
things about us as a people and nation. It is just plain
craven.
Third, Egypt has about 80 million people. Let’s say that
at a maximum, there have been 800,000 or even 1,800,000
demonstrators against Mubarak (whom I totally believe is not a nice
guy). That means we have the views of one or two per cent that
Mubarak should go. How do the other 98 or 99 per cent feel? We
don’t know. But why should a large group of demonstrators be able
to control the electoral process when they are a tiny fraction of
the population?
The Bolsheviks seized power in Russia in 1917 with a tiny
sliver of the urban population. The results were catastrophic. The
same thing happened in France in its Revolution. Again, disastrous
results. I would love to see an example of when an urban mass
demonstration led to a better government (especially in the
Mideast, but anywhere, for that matter). Should a mass gathering of
the Tea Party be allowed to oust Mr. Obama? No, there have to be
procedures for the people to choose for the government to have
legitimacy, and what we are seeing in Cairo looks more like a coup
than an orderly process for getting the people’s will about power.
(We’re not going to like it when we do get it, by the
way.)
By the way, I keep seeing that there is fantastic
unemployment in Egypt and that’s what the crowds want to change.
How are they going to do that? How will a new government get work
for these people? Why are they not already sought out as low wage
workers for manufacturing or textiles in our global economy?
Something is going on in Egypt and the whole Arab world mind set
relative to work and that something is not succeeding. Will kicking
out Mubarak change that? If so, how?
Good luck to Egypt. Good luck to the people who cover
Egypt for CNN and everyone else. As for me, it just looks like a
sad story I have seen before, and I have work to do to feed my
family. My ancestors left Egypt long ago, and I’m not going back.
Not in any way.
