I've been trying to formulate these thoughts and collected articles for months, and the events of protest and riots over the past few days have led me to return to putting this together. Even as I write this, there are more and more articles and stories that relate, and yet the topic seems to grow more incomplete as the uncertainty grows. The latest Embassy protests related to the YouTube trailer have only intensified the importance of this topic, so I offer this not as a definitive statement, but an incomplete set of summaries along a very foggy path...
As many of you know, we arrived in Cairo in January, before the anniversary of the "revolution", the events proceeding from January 25, 2011 that led to the resignation and criminalization of long-term President Hosni Mubarak. Though this event was the pinnacle of the so-called "Arab Spring", many are beginning to question giving this the title "revolution"(and prefer "awakening") until the results of the events have more clearly unfolded, especially as there seems to be more questions than answers, more problems than solutions, more debates, than decision.
One of the most consistent and controversial debates that we have witnessed in our short time here has been the discussions on "free expression."
As the goal of the "revolution/awakening" was a more democratic society, one of the immediate avenues of this was to express disagreement with the state-run news agencies and politics of the Mubarak "regime". In the 1800's, the "pen is mightier than the sword"; in the 2000's, "Freedom of Expression" through "texts & tweets" proved mightier than tanks. Unsatisfied people rallied together and caused others to do so through the internet blogs, social networking such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as simply uploading video to YouTube and to news agencies.
As the new day dawned in Egypt, the same methods that united a population's freedom of expression against their leader began to be used to divide people as their freedom of expression became as diverse as the number of people using the forms of media. By the time elections could be held, there was such a splintering of opinions that the candidates that survived the first round did not represent any of the "revolutionary" ideals that had previously so united a nation just more than a year before. Since then, there have been efforts to unite the revolutionary voices under a "third current", but the debate about freedom of expression is even among those ranks as they each want to maintain their own ideals and newly formed political parties.
Differences appear to be the bricks ready to pave the road to democracy in Egypt--whether or not those differences can be constructively aligned rather than just piling up will determine whether or not the road leads somewhere better or just more of a mess; and this is the debate of freedom of expression.
Just as "Freedom of Speech" is a First Amendment Constitutional right in the democracy of the United States, so freedom of expression (in forms even beyond speech) is a foundational part of a true democratic society. The ability to hold and express differences of perspective, opinion, belief, culture, etc. are the means by which free-societies allow debate and decision on any number of topics, elections, policies, laws, or judgments. Though most free-societies usually settle within two competing extremes of thought, on any given subject, there can exist a spectrum of opinions and desires even within one extreme--again, the ability to freely express your distinction from another is the means by which democratic societies move forward. The flip side of this foundational right is that others have equal ability to disagree and take a different opinion/stance from yours--being able to accept this is the dividing line between civility and chaos.
Are you free to disagree or be different in Egypt?...
On August 24, the first Friday after the holy month of Ramadan, there were all sorts of demonstrations scheduled to take place in and around Tahrir Square; Tahrir is the place for demonstrations now, and after several major news events during Ramadan, this was the first opportunity to do so. Some Islamic leaders taught that those going to protest were doing so against new President Morsy because he was representing Islamic ideals--their listeners were stirred up to prevent these potential demonstrations (see picture). The numbers of demonstrators were few compared to what many projected to be a busy day in downtown Cairo on that Friday; however, the fewer numbers may have prevented greater loss of life and bloodshed as several were injured and at least one killed in what is now being called "anti-Morsi protests" (though, as referenced earlier, there were a multitude of reasons for protests today). In fact, the death reported came from a demonstration at the Nile Towers for other reasons according to this report.
At the center of days like August 24 are the right to express grievances and to have things changed--mass protests would seem to be a statement of last resort, once channels are exhausted; after all, the Mubarak regime ruled for decades and it's reported that people just got to a "boiling point" that led to January 25. Morsy has only been in office a few months and people planned to go demonstrating in Tahrir--why? Because there doesn't seem to be proper channels, checks or balances, or any believable process by which things can be changed unless the people show up in force. Mass demonstrations seem to be the means to affect policy and public opinion, the way to express desires for change; so, demonstrators took to the streets and squares again.
What about the "pen" and traditional forms of news media? Freedom of Expression is still uncertain among the news agencies. There have been an explosion of new news agencies in Egypt, some being broadcast from beyond the countries borders and into Egypt. These have provided a variety of opinions, and each have led to a variety of grievances. Meanwhile, though the state news agencies promise to not be puppets for the leaders, news paper editors await trial for defaming the Brotherhood or President Morsy on the grounds that they were inciting people to revolt--fortunately, they can wait for their day in court now without waiting in jail. There have been demonstrations by journalists for greater freedom of expression, indicating they are not certain what they write will be protected if it differs from the opinion of leaders.
Islamic news agencies and personalities are finding their way into freedom of expression in the post-Mubarak culture of Egypt. A new channel and television show made a few headlines showing women fully veiled, and then world-wide news was made when newscaster Fatma Nabil wore the hijab earlier this month. The Mubarak controlled media prevented such displays because of wanting to appear more western and therefore more "modern"--similarly, military personnel were prohibited from having beards, a ban that is also now lifted under new President Morsy.
And now, the violent, destructive responses to the YouTube Video...
The latest set of demonstrations at US embassies worldwide and particularly in Libya and Egypt, have put the Freedom of Expression debate front and center. Watch this Al Jazeera "Inside Story" debate which aired earlier this morning 09-14-2012...
And who is right in the above debate?
In the short program above, you have a civilized debate among those who have long adopted the idea of freedom of expression, and yet you still have some very strong differences when it relates to things like the YouTube video in question. Now, imagine people coming out of the so-called "Arab Spring" who have not only not known the extent of such freedoms, but have yet to fully wrestle with the mental, rational, emotional, and spiritual ramifications of such freedoms and you have the cauldron that has become the powder-keg that we are now seeing erupting throughout the region.
Sadder still, most of this frenzy is based off of 2nd-hand reports, not eye-witness accounts of the video. Even worse, you have in Cairo (as the Egyptian panelist in the video pointed out and as was later confirmed by an Al Jazeera reporter today) that many of the ones fighting and protesting against the police and security forces don't even really care about the video; instead, they are out fighting against the police, basically looking for a fight (riot).
And to top it off, you see again that Cairo is an epicenter: what happens here has shockwaves throughout the region. The Libya situation was a tragic event and may have been isolated; but Cairo's media presence throughout the Middle East, as well as their now history of "successful" revolution, leads others across the region to respond similarly. And like any copycat situation played out in the media, it only snowballs and escalates for greater attention and news-coverage. In fact, while the origins, purpose, and people behind the video are being investigated for blame, perhaps some blame has to be attributed to the news agencies whose constant (and sometimes sensational coverage) has only literally fueled the flames of these protests.
And here is the hope of the Egyptian Awakening--if the free expression of different ideals can progress without rage or insult, but rather with openness of heart and mind, perhaps the epicenter of change in the Middle East could open the doors to new ideas, new discussion, and even new decisions than previously thought possible throughout the region.
We are people of hope.
Thanks for your prayers during these days--if you would like to, please comment to share your opinions and thoughts on freedom of expression, current events, or whatever...
As many of you know, we arrived in Cairo in January, before the anniversary of the "revolution", the events proceeding from January 25, 2011 that led to the resignation and criminalization of long-term President Hosni Mubarak. Though this event was the pinnacle of the so-called "Arab Spring", many are beginning to question giving this the title "revolution"(and prefer "awakening") until the results of the events have more clearly unfolded, especially as there seems to be more questions than answers, more problems than solutions, more debates, than decision.
One of the most consistent and controversial debates that we have witnessed in our short time here has been the discussions on "free expression."
As the goal of the "revolution/awakening" was a more democratic society, one of the immediate avenues of this was to express disagreement with the state-run news agencies and politics of the Mubarak "regime". In the 1800's, the "pen is mightier than the sword"; in the 2000's, "Freedom of Expression" through "texts & tweets" proved mightier than tanks. Unsatisfied people rallied together and caused others to do so through the internet blogs, social networking such as Facebook and Twitter, as well as simply uploading video to YouTube and to news agencies.
As the new day dawned in Egypt, the same methods that united a population's freedom of expression against their leader began to be used to divide people as their freedom of expression became as diverse as the number of people using the forms of media. By the time elections could be held, there was such a splintering of opinions that the candidates that survived the first round did not represent any of the "revolutionary" ideals that had previously so united a nation just more than a year before. Since then, there have been efforts to unite the revolutionary voices under a "third current", but the debate about freedom of expression is even among those ranks as they each want to maintain their own ideals and newly formed political parties.
Differences appear to be the bricks ready to pave the road to democracy in Egypt--whether or not those differences can be constructively aligned rather than just piling up will determine whether or not the road leads somewhere better or just more of a mess; and this is the debate of freedom of expression.
Just as "Freedom of Speech" is a First Amendment Constitutional right in the democracy of the United States, so freedom of expression (in forms even beyond speech) is a foundational part of a true democratic society. The ability to hold and express differences of perspective, opinion, belief, culture, etc. are the means by which free-societies allow debate and decision on any number of topics, elections, policies, laws, or judgments. Though most free-societies usually settle within two competing extremes of thought, on any given subject, there can exist a spectrum of opinions and desires even within one extreme--again, the ability to freely express your distinction from another is the means by which democratic societies move forward. The flip side of this foundational right is that others have equal ability to disagree and take a different opinion/stance from yours--being able to accept this is the dividing line between civility and chaos.
Are you free to disagree or be different in Egypt?...
 |
| This picture near Tahrir Square was taken August 24 at one of the locations where "anti-Morsy" demonstrators were prevented from reaching the Square. (Reuter's Photo) |
At the center of days like August 24 are the right to express grievances and to have things changed--mass protests would seem to be a statement of last resort, once channels are exhausted; after all, the Mubarak regime ruled for decades and it's reported that people just got to a "boiling point" that led to January 25. Morsy has only been in office a few months and people planned to go demonstrating in Tahrir--why? Because there doesn't seem to be proper channels, checks or balances, or any believable process by which things can be changed unless the people show up in force. Mass demonstrations seem to be the means to affect policy and public opinion, the way to express desires for change; so, demonstrators took to the streets and squares again.
What about the "pen" and traditional forms of news media? Freedom of Expression is still uncertain among the news agencies. There have been an explosion of new news agencies in Egypt, some being broadcast from beyond the countries borders and into Egypt. These have provided a variety of opinions, and each have led to a variety of grievances. Meanwhile, though the state news agencies promise to not be puppets for the leaders, news paper editors await trial for defaming the Brotherhood or President Morsy on the grounds that they were inciting people to revolt--fortunately, they can wait for their day in court now without waiting in jail. There have been demonstrations by journalists for greater freedom of expression, indicating they are not certain what they write will be protected if it differs from the opinion of leaders.
Islamic news agencies and personalities are finding their way into freedom of expression in the post-Mubarak culture of Egypt. A new channel and television show made a few headlines showing women fully veiled, and then world-wide news was made when newscaster Fatma Nabil wore the hijab earlier this month. The Mubarak controlled media prevented such displays because of wanting to appear more western and therefore more "modern"--similarly, military personnel were prohibited from having beards, a ban that is also now lifted under new President Morsy.
And now, the violent, destructive responses to the YouTube Video...
The latest set of demonstrations at US embassies worldwide and particularly in Libya and Egypt, have put the Freedom of Expression debate front and center. Watch this Al Jazeera "Inside Story" debate which aired earlier this morning 09-14-2012...
And who is right in the above debate?
All sides--there is responsibility on the offender and the offended to act and respond better than this.
In the short program above, you have a civilized debate among those who have long adopted the idea of freedom of expression, and yet you still have some very strong differences when it relates to things like the YouTube video in question. Now, imagine people coming out of the so-called "Arab Spring" who have not only not known the extent of such freedoms, but have yet to fully wrestle with the mental, rational, emotional, and spiritual ramifications of such freedoms and you have the cauldron that has become the powder-keg that we are now seeing erupting throughout the region.
Sadder still, most of this frenzy is based off of 2nd-hand reports, not eye-witness accounts of the video. Even worse, you have in Cairo (as the Egyptian panelist in the video pointed out and as was later confirmed by an Al Jazeera reporter today) that many of the ones fighting and protesting against the police and security forces don't even really care about the video; instead, they are out fighting against the police, basically looking for a fight (riot).
And to top it off, you see again that Cairo is an epicenter: what happens here has shockwaves throughout the region. The Libya situation was a tragic event and may have been isolated; but Cairo's media presence throughout the Middle East, as well as their now history of "successful" revolution, leads others across the region to respond similarly. And like any copycat situation played out in the media, it only snowballs and escalates for greater attention and news-coverage. In fact, while the origins, purpose, and people behind the video are being investigated for blame, perhaps some blame has to be attributed to the news agencies whose constant (and sometimes sensational coverage) has only literally fueled the flames of these protests.
And here is the hope of the Egyptian Awakening--if the free expression of different ideals can progress without rage or insult, but rather with openness of heart and mind, perhaps the epicenter of change in the Middle East could open the doors to new ideas, new discussion, and even new decisions than previously thought possible throughout the region.
We are people of hope.
Thanks for your prayers during these days--if you would like to, please comment to share your opinions and thoughts on freedom of expression, current events, or whatever...
No comments:
Post a Comment