Although recently the OWS group has issued some demands it differs from the
Tahrir Square protests in not concentrating on specific demands. The Tahrir
protests concentrated upon specific demands. Thus the Egyptian government could
compromise on some. However note that the emergency law is still in place. The
demand for its removal was one of the original demands of protesters. One will
have to wait and see what happens in terms of military tribunals as well. The
military council has used them more often than Mubarak did in his entire period
of rule.
Cheers, ken
________________________________
From: Jim Devine <[email protected]>
To: Pen-l <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, October 3, 2011 10:30 AM
Subject: [Pen-l] From Juan Cole on Occupy Wall Street vs. Tahrir Square protests
New York and Cairo Protests Show Egyptian 1% more Responsive than the American
Posted: 02 Oct 2011 01:22 AM PDT
In two protests thousands of miles away from one another on Saturday,
a similar spirit of demand for government responsiveness to the people
was made. In both cases there was a police crackdown and some clashes
broke out. But in one case, the government showed flexibility and
attempted to take steps to calm the anger of the people. In the other,
the government was silent and no changes were envisioned.
In New York, a group of protesters in the Occupy Wall Street movement
marched off to the Brooklyn Bridge, and many marched on the road,
blocking traffic. The New York police cordoned off both sides of the
bridge and then arrested some 700 persons. The protesters have many
demands, but a central one is that the Federal government should be
representing the lower 99% of income earners, and not just the top 1
percent. They also want re-regulation of the bank and finance
industries.
Across the world in Cairo Egypt, police cleared protesters from Tahrir
Square on Saturday, provoking some rock-throwing. The square has been
repeatedly occupied and cleared since the revolution began on January
25. I was there on August 1 when the fasting month of Ramadan began
and most protesters went home, and the police were emboldened to move
against the few who were left.
The protests started back up recently because of the election law.
Parliamentary elections will be held in several rounds starting
November 28. The election law specified that one third of seats would
be filled by independents. At the same time, unlike the situation in
Tunisia, the interim government has not banned politicians close to
the former regime from running. The fear is that Hosni Mubarak
cronies, because of their name recognition, money and networks of
cronies, will run especially well for the independent seats. Other
activists are angry that the state of emergency declared in 1981,
suspending key civil liberties, has still not been abolished, and that
a military junta directs the government, keeping power close to its
medalled chest.
In response to the renewed round of protests, and to a threat by two
big coalitions of political parties to boycott the polls if the law
was not changed, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF)
appears to have backed down, and will rewrite the election law so that
all seats are apportioned on a party basis.
The SCAF also set out a timetable leaving office, with presidential
elections set for next year this time after a new constitution is
approved by referendum.
The military also agreed to stop sending civilians to military trials,
a major complaint of democracy activists in Egypt.
On the other hand, there does not appear to be movement on abrogating
the emergency laws, a major demand of the protesters, though chief of
staff Sami Anan says that the SCAF will study the issue.
Every time the protesters and the parties mount a campaign over a set
of issues, the military seems to back down and give them some of what
they want. The July protests, mostly spear-headed by the New Left,
resulted in half of the civilian cabinet being changed out for figures
more acceptable to the protesters, and resulted in the trial of Hosni
Mubarak and his sons, on which the SCAF had dragged its feet.
American government is often a kind of elective dictatorship, where
politicians and bureaucrats feel that once they cast their ballots,
the people should sit down and shut up and let those elected run
everything and make all the decisions (even if those decisions clearly
run counter to what the electorate was signalling it wanted). Thus,
who could have imagined that by fall of 2011 there still had been no
significant reform of Wall Street so as to forestall effectively a
repeat of the 2008 crash? Surely such reforms were part of the change
people voted for in 2008? But ‘legislative capture,’ the process in
American politics whereby the industries and corporations regulated by
Congress tend to ‘capture’ the legislators through campaign
contributions, and then write the legislation themselves that
regulates their industry, ensures that very little change can be
enacted by Congress.
Since elected government is in the back pocket of the top 1%, and
since the top 1% is using derivatives and sharp practices to speculate
with the public’s money and is throwing people thereby out of their
jobs and their homes, it is only strange that more people weren’t on
the Brooklyn Bridge on Saturday.
When will American government show the flexibility and willingness to
compromise on issues with an engaged democratic public that the
generals in Cairo are showing?
--
Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
way and let people talk.) -- Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l
