THE EGYPTIAN REVOLUTION, ISLAMISM, AND 'MAJORITISM'

On the television this morning Trevor Phillips, former head of the Equalities Commission, lambasted the liberal left over its attitude to events in Egypt. "The Egyptian army’s ousting of Morsi," he opined,  had been a military coup and should be named as such. "Countries often elected people ‘the West’ did not care for," the will of the majority had to be respected. "Just because many thousands of people had assembled in Tahir Square calling for Morsi to go did not mean this represented the will of the people."

Now I do not know, any more than Mr Phillips, whether the majority of Egyptians supported Morsi’s removal; I do know that in a field in which the only opponent was a former Mubarak crony he received 51% of the vote. It is also clear that a very great many Egyptians were alarmed by the steady attempt to turn Egypt into an Islamic state, in particular that Morsi, less than a year in office, had already attempted to subvert the constitution.

There is more than a whiff of chutzpah about the string of Islamists now appearing in print, on television, radio, and the internet, demanding respect for the democratic process; Islamists not always showing such respect for free speech and constitutional propriety. Indeed, to adapt a phrase of Lenin’s, Islamists can be said to support democracy in much the same way as a scaffold supports a condemned man.

Still the intervention of the military in this way, whether supported by a majority or a significant minority seems to me to be both a mistake and a blunder.Whilst the alleged shooting down of unarmed Islamist protesters, if proven, is a crime and should be punished. Unlike the Islamists I do not hold human life, even the life of my enemies, cheap. 

In seeking to militarily defeat the Islamists the army are not only committing a crime they are setting in train events that they cannot possibly hope to control; the danger of an Algerian style civil war is a real possibility.

However it may well be that what has happened was always going to happen, given the Islamist contempt for civil liberties, the rights of women and minorities. That the sudden outpouring of rage at the way Morsi was behaving prompted the army, always hostile to the Muslim Brotherhood, to act much sooner that it intended.

However it is very easy for Mr Philips, or indeed detached observers like my self, sitting in the stability and comfort of England to smugly and arrogantly diagnose events in Egypt. Whilst in reality  the dynamics of the Egyptian revolution are evolving under the kind of pressure we have not experienced in this country since the Civil War.

Underlying Mr Philips disposable remarks lies the issue of, what I have called elsewhere, ‘majoritism.’ This view, shared by the Islamists and many on the far right and far left, is a winner takes all view of the ballot box. In this view the rights of minorities or unpopular causes are wiped out by the ‘authority’ vested in the votes of the majority. It is not a view I share, or indeed the basis for a civilised society.

I am an atheist, I believe that the harm done by religion greatly outweighs any good that it performs. Yet if by some magic tomorrow the overwhelming majority of society was to share my view, say 95%, and this majority wanted to outlaw the practice of religion, compel all churches, mosques, temples and synagogues to close, they would be no more justified in doing so than if a opposite majority of the same size sought to outlaw my own atheist beliefs today. Thus whenever I am solemnly informed that it is the will of the majority that, say, all prisoners be prohibited the franchise, or that hanging should be re-instated, my response tends to be ‘so-what?’ The same goes for the defence of women’s rights in Islamic states or the rights of gay men and women in Russia. I don’t care that the majority are in favour of discriminatory policies, it does not make them right, and I stand in solidarity with all those minorities battling for justice and equality.

In the Federal Elections in Germany in November 1932 the Nazi’s emerged, rather like Cameron in 2010, as the largest party but without an overall majority. Shortly afterwards in January 1933, in a manner wholly in tune with the constitution, Hitler became chancellor and the Nazi’s came to power.
 Just suppose the German Army had taken a more spirited approach to the defence of democracy and, after witnessing the Nazi strangulation of free speech and dissent, stepped in to depose the Nazi government? Presumably the likes of Mr Phillips would hold that they had acted illegitimately? Or then again perhaps not, for we have the benefit of hindsight, something denied the Egyptian people.

If possible it would have been better to negotiate an interim government in Egypt, allowing Morsi to remain in power pending fresh elections. In this way it might have been possible to facilitate a process that did not humiliate the Islamists so much, have been possible to keep them on board, whilst placing constitutional safeguards in place. Perhaps, certainly easy for me say, and anyhow will anything short of an outright Islamist state ever placate the Muslim Brotherhood?

In one respect Mr Phillips makes a good point, the issues raised by the military intervention,- coup if you like,- in Egypt cannot be ducked by those on the left who support the ongoing revolution in Egypt. For my self, however things pan out in Egypt, I know where my support and solidarity lies, it is with those fighting for a free and open society, a society that respects secular values and upholds the rights of women and minorities.

Having visited this page I would be grateful for your feedback, either tick one of the boxes below or make a comment via the comments button.