Post-revolution polls in Egypt

The current front-runner is a Truther;

The current front runner if you look at a particular one of the many, many polls being taken, hardly any of which agree.

And even the poll you cite is not nearly as straightforward as you imply.

"The situation on the ground is changing by the day," says principal investigator Shibley Telhami, a University of Maryland political scientist who conducts regular polling across the Middle East. "Morsi's numbers may be deceiving, and it is probable that he'll exceed his low showing in the poll. We know that political machinery is essential in getting out the vote. But the Brotherhood has already lost some of its early advantages."

Telhami adds that predictive political polling in Egypt is especially challenging now because electoral behavior is still in the formative stage. "The experiment is new, coalitions are still forming, and little information is available about turnout and likely voters," he says.

If mind-numbing stupidity was an exportable commodity then Egypt would be rich.

Well, they do favor Mitt Romney over Obama by 3 to 1, according to the same poll.

Even Israeli Jews are 50/50 on that (with a slight edge to Obama).
 
The current front runner if you look at a particular one of the many, many polls being taken, hardly any of which agree.

And even the poll you cite is not nearly as straightforward as you imply.





Well, they do favor Mitt Romney over Obama by 3 to 1, according to the same poll.

Even Israeli Jews are 50/50 on that (with a slight edge to Obama).

The Zio-pigs are more progressive than the Egyptian freedom fighters? Cmon.
 
The thing is that even if 90% of Egyptians support liberal democracy (which they don't) but 10% are ruthless people with guns then the 10% will win. We saw that in Lebanon where Hezbollah crushed the March 14th movement and became the power behind the throne.

Ruthless guys with guns get their way. That's how politics works in that part of the world. That's why liberalism failed to take root in the Arab world. Liberals, by definition don't car-bomb and assassinate their rivals.

Remember that Egypt is a very poor, backwards and deeply conservative place with a lot of systemic problems (to put it lightly). The hip Facebook youth are only the tiniest fraction of the population.

So what would it take for it to overcome its poverty, backwardness, and conservativeness? And is overcoming that any harder than overcoming the systemic problems (or are those actually part of the systemic problems)?
 
Last edited:
So what would it take for it to overcome its poverty, backwardness, and conservativeness? And is overcoming that any harder than overcoming the systemic problems (or are those actually part of the systemic problems)?

Let me go ahead and save you the time and effort replying to this, Virus.

"Their culture is bad and they should change it."
 
So what would it take for it to overcome its poverty, backwardness, and conservativeness? And is overcoming that any harder than overcoming the systemic problems (or are those actually part of the systemic problems)?

The need the same things that any other country needs to prosper. The Rule of law, property rights, transparency, economic freedom. But institutions don't fall from the sky. They are expressions of the larger culture.

They need more people who think like Western people to pull that off. Even then it's hard because of the centrality of violence in Arab political culture which chews liberal-minded people up and spits them out.

Perhaps they can one day produce a reform-minded autocrat to carry out this transition like an Arab Kemal Ataturk.
 
The need the same things that any other country needs to prosper. The Rule of law, property rights, transparency, economic freedom. But institutions don't fall from the sky. They are expressions of the larger culture.

They need more people who think like Western people to pull that off. Even then it's hard because of the centrality of violence in Arab political culture which chews liberal-minded people up and spits them out.

Perhaps they can one day produce a reform-minded autocrat to carry out this transition like an Arab Kemal Ataturk.

So does this mean every culture needs to transform itself into a facsimile of Western culture?! Or just certain parts of Western culture? What kind of "cultural diversity" is OK and what kind isn't?
 
So does this mean every culture needs to transform itself into a facsimile of Western culture?! Or just certain parts of Western culture? What kind of "cultural diversity" is OK and what kind isn't?

If you want to live like the West you have to think like the West.
 
So does this mean every culture needs to transform itself into a facsimile of Western culture?! Or just certain parts of Western culture? What kind of "cultural diversity" is OK and what kind isn't?

The answers always seem to be the same no matter what the country. You need less corruption. You need to eliminate cronyism. You need promotion based on merit. You need to promote education other than religious education. You need to promote the rights of women and minorities. You need to create lateral mobility within the classes, and you need to introduce competition in order to promote productivity and upward mobility.
 
The answers always seem to be the same no matter what the country. You need less corruption.

Strangely no. See bangladesh's growth rate (or russia's for that matter). Corruption on its own is not a killer. Its curruption combiened with other weaknesses.

You need to promote the rights of women and minorities.

Again no. Minorities are by definition minorities. Its entirely possible to build a fairly sucessful economy while ignoring them completely. Or of course you can follow the south african model of building an economy around a minority and using the majority as cheap labour. The role of women again really depends on what kind of economy you are trying to construct.
 
If you want to live like the West you have to think like the West.

Not entirely. For example Japan spent most of the post war years being run in what would be regarded as a deeply disfuctional manner by western standards.
 
Strangely no. See bangladesh's growth rate (or russia's for that matter). Corruption on its own is not a killer. Its curruption combiened with other weaknesses.

Russian culture is superior to Egyptian culture.
 
Not entirely. For example Japan spent most of the post war years being run in what would be regarded as a deeply disfuctional manner by western standards.

It was run 1000X better than Egypt is.
 
Strangely no. See bangladesh's growth rate (or russia's for that matter). Corruption on its own is not a killer. Its curruption combiened with other weaknesses.

Would the growth be faster or slower without the corruption?

You might be able to improve an economy without addressing corruption, but it's possible to carry water in a leaky bucket too. It's just a lot easier, and a lot more rewarding for your efforts, if you fix the bucket first.

Again no. Minorities are by definition minorities. Its entirely possible to build a fairly sucessful economy while ignoring them completely. Or of course you can follow the south african model of building an economy around a minority and using the majority as cheap labour. The role of women again really depends on what kind of economy you are trying to construct.

People empowered are people incented to participate and to compete. They become a greater resource. Again, it may be possible to make improvements without addressing these issues, but so easier if you do.
 
Name a single accomplishment of Egypt that the rest of the world took notice of.

And what does that have to do with "culture"?

The Soviet Union accomplished far more things that the world took notice of than Greece did during the same period. That means you think the "culture" of the USSR was far superior to that of the cradle of Western democracy, right?
 

Back
Top Bottom