Liberal Change is it worth it?


FACE-BOOK   NOT THE CHANGE WE’VE BEEN WAITING FOR!
Will Face-Book and the use of Internet manipulation change institutions in the Middle East? To answer this question it is beneficial to begin with the most successful revolution in the history of mankind the American Revolution.  The American Revolution in many ways was the beginning of modern day individualism and the idea of the right of mankind to think for themselves.  In the eighteenth century information was reserved for the learned and the political class of society, and upward movement was difficult.  The founding fathers of the United States were mindful of the impact information and knowledge would have on their cause combined with Jefferson, Adams and Madison’s ideas about human nature and the rights of man.  It would be this combination of individuals willing to share their ideas with the masses that would launch an independence revolution. 
Federalist paper 51 Madison states, “In framing a government which is to be administered by men over men, the great difficulty lies in this you must first enable the government to control the government, and in the next place oblige it to control itself.”  11 (Eidsmoe, 1995) John Adams argued for the natural rights and liberty of man during the debate for a Declaration of Independence.  The founding fathers also knew the power of the printed word and the media Paul Johnson in his account of the Revolution says this, “The American Revolution was the first event of its kind in which the media played a role almost a determining one from first to the last.  Americans were already a media conscience people. They had a lot of newspapers and publications, and were getting more every month.  There were plenty of cheap printing presses. They now found they had scores indeed hundreds of inflammatory writers, matching the fiery orators in the assemblies with every polysyllabic word of condemnation they uttered.” 12 (Johnson, 1999) If the colonists were able to defeat a known institution with the use of media and inflammatory rhetoric it is not evident that the people in the Middle East can do the same. Wilson's vision of self-determination and making the world safe for democracy is a lofty concept, but in many parts of the world liberal ideals are difficult to establish. "Certainly, the liberalism of Adams, Jefferson, Jackson, Wilson, and President George W Bush is in stark contrast to the culture of Islam. That said; Islam is an egalitarian religion. In its height Islam was surrounded by societies that believed in aristocracies and feudal fiefdoms, India with its caste system to the East, the privilege system of the Byzantine Empire, and Latin Europe to the West. Islam rejected this social differentiation in these cultures." 1 (Lewis, 2002) 
The revolutions pre-1914 took time to develop, and the uprisings in the Middle East today have been growing over time as well.  Out of the Russian Revolution came the Soviet Union, Mao produced the Cultural Revolution in China, but there was a common economic theme and that distribution of wealth was uneven.  Not unlike what is occurring in the countries of Egypt, Libya, Tunisia, Syria, and Jordon. A comparison of the GDPs of the Islamic countries surrounding Israel would demonstrate a great disparity.
1. Israel 36,000
2. Jordon 5,000
3. Syria 2,000
4. Egypt 4,000
5. Iraq 5,000
(https://freedomhouse.org/regions/middle-east-and-north-africa)
Why the disparity? Institutions based in Marxism, Capitalism, Socialism, Communism, Liberalism and Realism developed through certain events and various personalities in time and space, but how fast can they adapt to change? The question is why is Israel a more successful country economically and culturally than her surrounding neighbors? Why is liberalism a successful world view compared to other philosophies like Marxism, Socialism, and Communism? Here's another question why are some countries more successful than others. Why is it that countries who have been developed cannot seem to develop economically and provide for basic needs of its people?  How easily can institutions change?  Marxist institutions fell in the year of 1989, but that was only the time the events occurred, what was stirring beneath the event was building up to the fall of the Iron Curtain.  Events like President Reagan building American defenses, the opening up of trade, ensuring the free flow of oil to the world markets. The same thing can be used in explaining the events in the Middle East today, Face-Book and Twitter may have brought it to the attention of the world, but these revolutions, or changes were developing well before 2011.
These ideas have morphed into a combination of the other.  With this change and merging of ideas and the fast pace of information sharing new theories will be developed. Will Islam compete with existing thought and have a new generation of followers?  As history progresses and technology improves new ideas must be adapted to reflect the context of the time.  It's this context that is in a perpetual state of change.  The only constant is change and it’s this constant which will make for the one-many tension.  Individuals having authority within these institutions and the pervasiveness of information makes managing information difficult.  With this difficulty is authority being redistributed or can individuals gain enough information to gain authority for themselves?  There have been comparisons made between the events in Egypt, Tunisia, Libya, and now Syria and Jordon to the revolutions of 1848. There’s no doubt the events will have a dramatic effect on American foreign policy.
The utilization of Face-book may have brought the attention of Tunisia and Egypt to the world, but it was not the spark that lit the revolutions in Egypt Tunisia Syria Jordan and now Libya. During the 80s under the Reagan Administration the United States enjoyed a fair amount of stability and relationships in the Middle East. During the Clinton Administration Ehud Barack and Arafat negotiated at Camp David, but the agreement fell apart as others before.  President Jimmy Carter arguably the most successful Middle East peace negotiator was able to have gained a peace treaty between Egypt's Sadat and Israel’s Menachem Begin.
This context is definitely part of the underlying zeitgeist as it were in the Middle East and of course during this time a new generation was developing. Systems theorists such as Durkheim use the metaphor of a volcano. The volcano being the Middle East and; within this well of the Middle East a new generation was taking shape. The dictators were not prepared for the long term effects of new technology, and new methods of communication.  2 (Kimmel, 1990) With a population today of which is 60% under the age of 30 it was inevitable leaders such as Mubarak and Qaddafi now find themselves forced to deal with the reality. While Middle East dictators in countries were amassing fortunes due to their revenues brought in through oil exports the people living in these countries were not seeing the benefits of the economy and becoming more and more frustrated. It’s been this frustration that has led to the Middle East uprisings we have today.  The business as usual policy is certainly testing liberal thought towards the region. On the surface the Middle East seems to be on the cusp of developing new thoughts toward political reform, but institutions do not change overnight.  Face-Book brought the Tunisia protests to the fore front, but the events were going to happen at some point.
What is required for a successful democratic government thrive in the Arab and Middle East; will the uprisings in the Middle East be successful?
The most successful revolution was the American Revolution against the British Empire. Will the uprisings in the Middle East be successful?  If so, how will American foreign policy adapt to the new changes in the Middle East? Can the United Nations accept the new leaders and who will emerge as either friends or foes?  The question for everyone is what side of change will the liberal societies be on as new Princes emerge? The United States has been successful in that allowing individuals the freedom to develop new methods of communication.  It’s been this new method of communication that led to the events in the Middle East.  The United States is a liberal society however, as a liberal society how willing is the United States able to accept the change in the Middle East? 
Economics is a major factor in how changes or revolutions begin.  In the Middle East if political change occurs towards a democratic process it becomes more pronounced.  Egypt controls some access through the Suez Canal, and Libya is an oil producer.  The American economy is base in large part to how much oil is used.  There is an American interest in Libya. The European countries too depend on the oil produced in the Middle East, more so than the United States. 
The Industrial Revolution began in the 18th century and spread across the world.  It was this Industrial Revolution that changed the face of humanity and also the face of war.  In many ways the same revolution or transformation of society is occurring today.  Conservative regimes during the 1848 uprisings were clinging to power as best they could, but it was the new technologies and forms of communication that helped to bring about change in Europe during 1848.  Can there be an honest discussion about the revolutions of 1848 to those occurring today in the Middle East.  Certainly parallels can be made; however, the context between the years of 2010 and 1848 are very different.  Are the events in the Middle East democratic revolutions, or were just another group who would like to have power?  Yes there are similarities such as people needing better distributions of food employment and security, but the countries these protests are occurring in are rich in oil a resource which is the main ingredient for the world economy.  Fareed Zakaria believes ‘The revolutions of 1848, are markedly similar in mood to what is happening right now in the Middle East they were dubbed the springtime of peoples by historians at the time. The backdrop then, as now, was recession rising food prices and autocratic monarchies.”  3 (Zakaria, 2011)  As then as is now the young were in the forefront new information technologies and mass newspapers connected the crowds not unlike what is happening now with the advent of Face-Book and My Space. 
The conduit for this change has been the use of technology and how individuals have been able to manipulate this technology for good and for bad.  It's this change or use of technology by individuals that governments have a difficulty in managing.
Alvin Toffler certainly a writer in the constructivist model and writer quotes Ralph Lapp a scientist and writer “We are aboard a train which is gathering speed, racing down the track on which there are an unknown number of switches leading to unknown destinations.”
4 (Toffler, 1970) No truer words have ever been said concerning the current state of the United States and the Middle East. The astonishing aspect of the current state of Egypt is how fast the protesters and change was able to develop.  The main tool used was the internet and a simple idea of communicating with each other through social networks developed by a young man from this generation named Mark Zuckerman.
Will liberalism be embraced in the Middle East?
Institutional change is very difficult, but calling for change and implementing policy is somewhat frustrating for NATO and American allies. In our institutions does this make for good American foreign-policy? The Bush doctrine of democracy in the Middle East on the surface seems to be good. However, the outcome may not be what we would like it to be as liberal Americans.  Joe Klein of Time magazine says, “The truth is, both strict realism and idealism have failed us overseas. Too often, realism is just a rationale for maintaining the autocratic status quo, which never lasts, especially when presided over by terminal narcissist like to bar Mubarak and Karzai. 
Too often, [Liberal] idealism assumes democracy can be plopped into a culture without a middle class or history of free institutions.” 5 (Klein, 2011) There's no doubt; a paradigm shift is taking place within the Middle East.  Protests within Egypt, Tunisia, Jordan and other parts were not anti-American or even anti-Israel but anti-Arab government. What caused this shift? Was it more openness to the West, the election of a new American president, President Obama's speech to the Arab world? Referring back to the original argument it was and is the use of technology and social networking. 
Liberal assumptions about human nature and democracy around the world may seem to be good on its surface. On the other hand, ideal liberalism asks more questions than it answers the same questions can be asked of the Middle East and specifically Egypt.  Fareed Zakaria in time magazine asks the same question “which it will be? Anyone making predictions with confidence is being a fool.  Egypt is a vast complex country and is in the midst of unprecedented change.  The Pew Research Center surveyed   Arabs in Egypt and found they have views any liberal would find extreme.  Pew Research found 82% of Egyptians support stoning as a punishment for adultery, 84% favor the death penalty for Muslims who leave the religion, and the struggle between modernization and fundamentalism 59% identified with the fundamentalism.  6 (Zakaria, 2011) The American conservative movement would definitely find these numbers appalling, but at the same time supported the Bush doctrine of Democracy in the Middle East.  The argument being a democratic Middle East would be a safer place, not anticipating the people in the Palestinian regions voting for a government that is antithetical to democratic ideals.  
There is an optimistic view towards the revolutions of the Middle East the economist magazine reports revolutions do not have to be like those in France of 1789, Russia in 1917 or Iran in 1979. The writer goes on to state the middle east has more in common with the popular color revolutions that change the world map in the late 20th century than those of Robespierre or trucks Trotsky running things behind the scenes during the late 19th century. The argument could be made this is a testament to the liberalism of our day.  7 (Anonymous, 2011) Tony Blair the former prime minister of Great Britain and an ally of the United States were asked the question what do the Arabs in the Middle East want?  The Prime Minister answered, “The Arab people want the benefits of a liberal society, but they also want to keep their cultural distinctions.”  This is the tension between realism and liberalism, because liberalism assumes its outcome is beneficial for all. 
Unlike realism whereby its main focus is beneficial for the state itself.  American foreign policy transitions from realism, liberalism and today constructivism, this causes frustration on the world stage.  The conservative argument for the War on Terror is if we don't fight them over there they will come to our shores and fight us here.  Within the context of post September 11, 2001 this argument does have some legitimacy.  There has been a ten year time span in between the attacks on the World Trade Center to the protests in Tunisia, Egypt, and other parts of the Middle East, what changed to spur on these anti Arab government protests?  What new technologies have been developed and what new method of information distribution has taken place?  It has been the use of social networking and individuals using existing technologies to change existing institutions. 
The issues in the Arab world are more complex than just a matter of using social networking and new technologies.  David Wessel of the Wall Street Journal says this concerning the protests in Egypt about the average educated Egyptian.  Protests across the Middle East are fueled by frustrations ranging from the lack of political freedom to police brutality. But if country's wracked by protest and those that have remained peaceful, a common thread runs: governments have expanded universities and educated is swelling cohort of youth, without laying the groundwork to employ them.  Surprisingly, the international monetary fund economist Yasser Abdih and Anjali Garg recently wrote, “unemployment in the Middle East and North African regions tends to increase with schooling in the United States the opposite is true.”  8 (Wessel, 2011) this is an interesting dilemma, because for years the Arab world has not been able to develop an open market system for the whole of society.  Compared to the free and open market systems liberal society take for granted.
There needs to be some perspective in the recent events in the Middle East.  Historically, the Middle East has been in constant conflict.  It’s difficult to define the uprisings today as revolutions or just political changes. Understandably, the lines between revolution and political movements are blurred, but in Middle East everything isn’t what it seems. This presents a dilemma for both the realist world of OPEC, the Arab Union and the United States and the west is how much compromise is each going to give to other? And if not, how willing is liberal society willing to continue engaging with the realist world of the Arab region?  Within this Arab world are many various sects of communities. The Economist magazine presents this dilemma as well, “Sectarian relations soured in the Middle East after Iraq's prime minister, Nuri al-Maliki, a Shia,  praise the mainly Shia protesters in Bahrain and criticized Sunni Saudi Arabia for helping to suppress them on behalf of the ruling Bahraini family, which is also Sunni. Hassan Nasrallah, leader of Hezbollah of Lebanon's powerful Shia party cum-militia, also aroused anger among Sunni governments in the Gulf by praising the Bahrain protesters and likening the ruling family there to Libya’s Qaddafis.” 9 (Anonymous, 2011) These questions could not have been asked twenty or thirty years ago, but today are more relevant for liberalism and American foreign-policy.  Neither could the protests we see in the Middle East have been developed as fast and efficient as occurred in Tahrir Square.
If there is an argument for a democratic Middle East Egypt would be a good test case.  Egypt is unique compared to other Middle Eastern countries.  There are institutions that have been developed like the Egyptian military respected by the people and they were resistant to the idea of shooting other Egyptian; in stark contrast to that of Libya and Qaddafi.  Maybe the time has come for not only asking the questions for liberal American foreign-policy, but also developing answers for these questions.
Malcolm Gladwell wrote an essay in the New York Magazine entitled how David beats Goliath he posed a two-part question does social media allow insurgents to adopt new strategies? And have those strategies been crucial? His answer was yes and yes. And for the answers history is our guide in the Philippines Pres. Jose Estrada was taken down through texting by the Filipino people. The Spanish Prime Minister José Luis Rodriguez used text messaging to coordinate the ouster of the People's Party in four days this occurred in 2004.  In 2009 the Moldovans infused social media to turn out over 20,000 protesters in just 36 hours.  In South Korea people rallied against beef imports in 2008 and they took their  grievances directly to the public sharing text videos, photos and videos online, but the common theme was these protesters actually didn't change the governments of these countries it just changed the individuals who lead these governments which still leaves the question open. 10 (Gladwell & Shirky, 2011) Can any country in the Middle East develop a well-managed democracy excluding countries like Turkey and Morocco?

CONCLUSION: 
Who will emerge as the democratic institution in Egypt and other parts of the Middle East?  Autocrats enjoy power, but are the people mature enough to be able to build a functioning democracy?  Will the new leaders have the capacity to deal with issues like sewage, running water, education, and housing for the poor, and the many health related areas like trained medical professionals to care for the population at large? All of this requires funds and management.  The main reason why the protesters were out on the streets was the high rate of unemployment, lack of services, and lack of opportunity.  The perception in Egypt was Mubarak was amassing fortunes for his personal gain and the people were suffering.  It was this combination aristocratic psychology that brought on the French Revolution, the Reign of Terror in 1848. Will human beings ever learn you should not abuse and mistreat other human beings?  The answer is no, but that will not stop liberal democracies from trying.  Face-Book has been a factor in the uprisings in the Middle East, but its effectiveness is only as good as the other end of a gun.  The golden rule still applies as it has through time and memorial; those who have the seat of power will remain so until the new Prince with better weapons and political support comes and takes his place.

Bibliography

7.  Anonymous. (2011, February 5). Egypt Rises Up. The Economist , p. 15.
9.  Anonymous. (2011, April 2). The World This Week. Islam and the Arab Revolutions
11. Eidsmoe, J. (1995). Christianity And The Constitution The Faith Of Our Founding Fathers. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Book House Company.
10. Economist Gladwell, M., & Shirky, C. (2011). From Innovation to Revolution`. Foreign Affairs, 153-154.
12. Johnson, P. (1999). A History Of The American People. New York, New York: Harper Collins.
1.  Lewis, B. (2002). What Went Wrong? New York, New York: Harper Collins.
5.  Klein, J. (2011). Does Safety Trump Democracy? Why strict realism and neoconservative
idealism have failed us overseas. Time Magazine, 25.
2.  Kimmel, M. S. (1990). Revolution A Sociological Interpretation. Great Britain: Temple University Press.
4.  Toffler, A. (1970). Future Shock. New York: Random House.
8.  Wessel, D. (2011, February 5). Arab World Built Colleges, but Not Jobs. Wall Street Journal,
pp.  A11.
3.  Zakaria, F. (2011). The Revolution. Time, 26.
6.  Zakaria, F. (2011, February 17). Why There's No Turning Back In The Middle East. Retrieved February 17, 2011, from Time.com: www.time.com/time/printout/0,8816,204804,00.html


Comments

Popular posts from this blog