[BRIEF NOTE] What sort of revolution is Egypt's (if a revolution at all)?

[rfmcdonald]

There are two links I've been interested in sharing with you, if only to help me out.

"Is there a revolution underway in Egypt?", Understanding Society's Daniel Little asked just two days ago. Using three different paradigms--Hujntington's definition of a revolution as a rapid change in the normative political values and institutions of a society, Skocpol's as the transformation of political and social structures, and Goldstone's of revolution as a consequence of state breakdown--Little concluded that the Tunisian and Egyptian events didn't fit the mold.

Perhaps the most we can say about Tunisia and Egypt is fairly descriptive: these were instances of governmental change forced by a largely spontaneous social movement that erupted into the streets, with very little organization or leadership. Promises of political reform were made in response to the demonstrations, and if these promises are kept, then the movement will have produced some degree of political reform in addition to the successful ouster of the dictator. So popular movements can push the governments of Tunisia and Egypt in the direction of more inclusive democratic political institutions. But this process, and these limited outcomes of political change, seem to fall far short of the idea of "revolution." And, along with the realism that Huntington often expresses about this sort of process, it is entirely possible that these transformations will be hijacked by other groups as events unfold, so that their progressive political goals will be frustrated.

(That was two days ago, I say again.)

Shiko Behar, over at 3 Quarks Daily, quite disagrees.

Are the events we have now been witnessing like the 1919 Egyptian revolution? While my answer would largely be yes, it is clear that present events are considerably deeper than those of 1919. The revolt of 1919 was built from the bottom-up against a foreign British colonial power that had ruled Egypt (since 1882). While more Egyptians were killed in 1919 than thus far in 2011, and while a rudimentary system of parliamentary democracy was forced upon the British occupiers in Egypt – the revolt’s ultimate result did not deliver Egyptian national independence and self-rule. Nor did it deliver a functioning and egalitarian “democratic” elections as elections were consistently rigged by a collaboration between the monarchy and the colonial power against the leading Nationalist movement (the Wafd). Are the events we have now been witnessing similar to Egypt’s 1952 revolution? Here my answer would be no. Events in 1952 were led by young army officers (calling themselves the Free Officers). True, these events did manage to terminate the Egyptian monarchy, oust King Farouk and lead to the emergence of non-democratic military rule (self-described as republican). But the 1952 revolution was – paradigmatically – a revolution from above by armed forces. While the new military rulers did initiate a thorough Land Reform, their actions and deeds did not involve the mass, bottom-up mobilisation that we are witnessing in the Egypt of 2011. Furthermore, Mubarak’s very paternalistic, chauvinist and patronising attitude/tone vis-à-vis “his” people probably have their roots in the Free Officers’ attitude. Egypt in 2011 is not Iran in 1979 if only because Iran 1979 happened as it did! The social forces that produced the events of 2011 are younger, more liberal, more democratic and more global and international that the forces that operated in 1979 Iran. And yes, 2011 is reminiscent of Eastern Europe in 1989. When the Egyptian masses encircled the Presidential Place and the headquarters of Egypt’s National Television I almost thought that we are about to relive a Romanian moment where protestors took control of the Romanian television and later killed dictator Nicolae Ceaușescu.

Lastly, is 2011 Cairo in the league of 1789 Paris? I for one believe that it certainly can be. Both ends came into existence as a result of popular mobilization. There were moments earlier today that I thought that the Egyptian army's initial complicity with the regime may have necessitated an Egyptian mass call "To the Bastille!" Luckily for the Egyptians, 2011 Cairo involved less blood and violence that 1789 Paris. But 2011 Egypt has the potential to introduce popular democratic self-rule and sovereignty to an incredibly important part of the world that thus far escaped it.

What say you?