Mason highlights the importance of scrutinising the Egyptian revolution beyond information we are initially presented with. The actions that began on January 25th 2011, inspired by the seeming success of their Tunisian neighbours, was the start of an 18-day revolution that toppled a dictator of over thirty years. Hosni Mubarak and his regime could not have anticipated the hundreds of thousands of Egyptians gathered in Tahrir Square in downtown Cairo, nor could they have foreseen the millions that followed suit in major cities across Egypt. From Cairo to Alexandria, from Suez to Luxor, an uprising took place for eighteen days until Mubarak stepped down from power on February 11th 2011. Since his downfall Mubarak and senior members of his regime have been placed on trial for corruption and conspiring to kill protesters. The Presidential elections, not without their own controversy over eligible candidates, are due to take place in June 2012, around the same time as Mubarak is sentenced. During the eighteen-day revolution, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) remained faithful to the citizens of Egypt. Now, fifteen months later, being accused of sustaining the former regime, SCAF is the centre of hostility towards the state.
25 january revolution essay
The assessment of revolutionary theory highlight the 2011 Egyptian Revolution is a complex event, not only because the uprising is placed in the context of wider geographical revolts but also because the goals and changes that occurred are diverse. Furthermore, as Arendt emphasises, beginning to analyse the changes that have resulted from those 18 days is challenging because the revolution is on going. The second part of this essay will assess the unique qualities of the revolution and the contemporary political relevance of the events to date.
2011 accommodated over 50 countries in some form of revolution or political uprising and more than 350 cities across the globe experienced an Occupy movement (The Guardian, Occupy protests around the world: 2011). Skinner (2011) suggests:
Plunkett, J., and J. Halliday, 2011, Al-Jazeera: A revolution in world news, pp.286-288 in Manhire, T. (ed.), 2012, The Arab Spring: Rebellion, revolution and a new world order, London: Guardian Books
One of the key foreign policy successes achieved in the years following the revolution of January 25th was the adoption of a more balanced foreign policy. While long-standing partnerships and relations have remained as important as ever, Egypt has taken steps to develop relations with partners that had previously not been given the priority they deserve. Since January 2011, Egypt has expanded its ties with Africa, revitalized relations with Asian countries, and established greater cooperation with Eastern European countries. While relations with the West have continued to develop, Egypt has expanded its horizons, as reflected in various Presidential visits conducted and memoranda of understanding signed with countries such as India, Singapore, Indonesia, Hungary, as well the establishment of a trilateral cooperation mechanism with Greece and Cyprus.
Egyptian society is characterized by its diversity, and one of the most memorable and commendable aspects of the revolution of January the 25th was that all Egyptians stood side by side regardless of gender, religion, or any other factor, voicing their common demands and caring for one another. This display of solidarity has inspired Egyptian society to take steps to further embrace its diversity throughout the past five years, despite the challenges that presented themselves.
Simultaneously, in 2014 two successive decrees by the President and the Cabinet set the maximum wage rate at EGP 42,000 ($5,500) per month for all public sector employees. This cap is equivalent to 35 times the minimum wage and has saved the government much-needed resources, which are now used to finance the new minimum wage. In addition to addressing social justice concerns and providing a decent life to all public sector employees, these two measures are intended to eradicate financial and administrative corruption, a major demand of the 25 January revolution. They therefore signal an important break with the past.
Combating corruption was an important demand of the revolution of January the 25th, and subsequently a national strategy to combat corruption was devised, with the aim of elevating the state administrative body and preserve public funds. The strategy enshrines a number of concepts, chief among them indiscriminate accountability.
It has been over a decade since I started studying this single article on English Wikipedia about the 2011 revolution. At the time of writing, it runs to almost 13,000 words and more than 400 citations.
Over a decade after the 2011 Egyptian revolution, Wikipedia is still the authority for facts about the event. If you ask Google, Bing or Yahoo what happened in Egypt in 2011, they will present facts extracted from the English Wikipedia article.
But I discovered a passion and feverish anticipation of revolution in Egypt from the very first entry on it, just hours after the protests began on January 25. Rather than rational consensus among dispassionate observers, Wikipedia mirrored the passion, emotion and violence of Tahrir Square.
Strongly militating against any serious attempt to establish monarchy was the enmity so prevalent in the revolutionary period toward royalty and the privileged classes. Some state constitutions had even prohibited titles of nobility. In the same year as the Philadelphia convention, Royall Tyler, a revolutionary war veteran, in his play The Contract, gave his own jaundiced view of the upper classes:
On October 5 anti-Federalist Samuel Bryan published the first of his "Centinel" essays in Philadelphia's Independent Gazetteer. Republished in newspapers in various states, the essays assailed the sweeping power of the central government, the usurpation of state sovereignty, and the absence of a bill of rights guaranteeing individual liberties such as freedom of speech and freedom of religion. "The United States are to be melted down," Bryan declared, into a despotic empire dominated by "well-born" aristocrats. Bryan was echoing the fear of many anti-Federalists that the new government would become one controlled by the wealthy established families and the culturally refined. The common working people, Bryan believed, were in danger of being subjugated to the will of an all-powerful authority remote and inaccessible to the people. It was this kind of authority, he believed, that Americans had fought a war against only a few years earlier.
In New York the Constitution was under siege in the press by a series of essays signed "Cato." Mounting a counterattack, Alexander Hamilton and John Jay enlisted help from Madison and, in late 1787, they published the first of a series of essays now known as the Federalist Papers. The 85 essays, most of which were penned by Hamilton himself, probed the weaknesses of the Articles of Confederation and the need for an energetic national government. Thomas Jefferson later called the Federalist Papers the "best commentary on the principles of government ever written."
By January 9, 1788, five states of the nine necessary for ratification had approved the Constitution--Delaware, Pennsylvania, New Jersey, Georgia, and Connecticut. But the eventual outcome remained uncertain in pivotal states such as Massachusetts, New York, and Virginia. On February 6, withFederalists agreeing to recommend a list of amendments amounting to a bill of rights, Massachusetts ratified by a vote of 187 to 168. The revolutionary leader, John Hancock, elected to preside over the Massachusetts ratifying convention but unable to make up his mind on the Constitution, took to his bed with a convenient case of gout. Later seduced by the Federalists with visions of the vice presidency and possibly the presidency, Hancock, whom Madison noted as "an idolater of popularity," suddenly experienced a miraculous cure and delivered a critical block of votes. Although Massachusetts was now safely in the Federalist column, the recommendation of a bill of rights was a significant victory for the anti-Federalists. Six of the remaining states later appended similar recommendations.
The fate of the United States Constitution after its signing on September 17, 1787, can be contrasted sharply to the travels and physical abuse of America's other great parchment, the Declaration of Independence. As the Continental Congress, during the years of the revolutionary war, scurried from town to town, the rolled-up Declaration was carried along. After the formation of the new government under the Constitution, the one-page Declaration, eminently suited for display purposes, graced the walls of various government buildings in Washington, exposing it to prolonged damaging sunlight. It was also subjected to the work of early calligraphers responding to a demand for reproductions of the revered document. As any visitor to the National Archives can readily observe, the early treatment of the now barely legible Declaration took a disastrous toll. The Constitution, in excellent physical condition after more than 200 years, has enjoyed a more serene existence. By 1796 the Constitution was in the custody of the Department of State along with the Declaration and traveled with the federal government from New York to Philadelphia to Washington. Both documents were secretly moved to Leesburg, VA, before the imminent attack by the British on Washington in 1814. Following the war, the Constitution remained in the State Department while the Declaration continued its travels--to the Patent Office Building from 1841 to 1876, to Independence Hall in Philadelphia during the Centennial celebration, and back to Washington in 1877. On September 29, 1921, President Warren Harding issued an Executive order transferring the Constitution and the Declaration to the Library of Congress for preservation and exhibition. The next day Librarian of Congress Herbert Putnam, acting on authority of Secretary of State Charles Evans Hughes, carried the Constitution and the Declaration in a Model-T Ford truck to the library and placed them in his office safe until an appropriate exhibit area could be constructed. The documents were officially put on display at a ceremony in the library on February 28, 1924. On February 20, 1933, at the laying of the cornerstone of the future National Archives Building, President Herbert Hoover remarked, "There will be aggregated here the most sacred documents of our history--the originals of the Declaration of Independence and of the Constitution of the United States." The two documents however, were not immediately transferred to the Archives. During World War II both were moved from the library to Fort Knox for protection and returned to the library in 1944. It was not until successful negotiations were completed between Librarian of Congress Luther Evans and Archivist of the United States Wayne Grover that the transfer to the National Archives was finally accomplished by special direction of the Joint Congressional Committee on the Library. 2ff7e9595c
Comentários