Egyptians can't be trusted with democracy

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Much to deal with in this thread; but that can wait. For now... um... you all do realise that the Mubarak regime promoted (in various different ways) Islam of the sort you all recoil from and was probably responsible for some of the attacks on the Copts?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Much to deal with in this thread; but that can wait. For now... um... you all do realise that the Mubarak regime promoted (in various different ways) Islam of the sort you all recoil from and was probably responsible for some of the attacks on the Copts?

I tried to point that out in the other thread when I mentioned that Egypt already has sharia law to some extent.

Yeah, I saw that. But the more who point it out - because it's massively important - the better.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Anyway, the fundamental problem with the argument that launched the thread is the implication that it is up to the West to decide which countries may or may not have elected governments. Not only is that ideologically dubious (and so obviously so that there's no need to elaborate. Besides, others have done so already), but it's also questionable from a practical point of view. Should Western soldiers invade Egypt and install a pliable puppet dictator to make sure that Western economic and strategic interests in the country are protected? Why, I'm sure that that would go down very well in a country with a colonial history within living memory and in which anti-imperalism (anti western imperialism, that is) forms - or at least used to - an important part of national identity?