1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to sidebar
Source link: http://archive.mises.org/15498/a-peoples-uprising-against-the-empire/

A People’s Uprising Against the Empire

February 1, 2011 by

More than the anti-Soviet protests of the late 1980s, the Egyptian uprisings reveal what might eventually come home to the American empire itself, under the right conditions and at the right time. FULL ARTICLE by Llewellyn H. Rockwell Jr.

{ 83 comments }

Boyfromworld February 1, 2011 at 10:10 am

Breaking away from Empire is great, but what it the choice is islamic theocracy and sharia-law?

BuckeyeChuck February 1, 2011 at 10:23 am

Then our response should be the same as it would be if they picked a secular representative government: give them no money, provide them no weaponry, and meddle not a whit in their affairs. We can encourage each other not to trade with them.

Many hold a premise that if they choose something other than what we desire, we have an obligation to intervene. I disagree. We desire for people to be free, but to give them freedom “by force” is a bit contradictory, no?

nate-m February 1, 2011 at 10:25 am

Who says that is going to happen? I see the talking heads spouting crap about it, but they are all statists and are supporting a government that is extremely valuable for the USA government policy in the region and they are trying find excuses to maintain the existing regime with calls for ‘orderly change’ and giving the leader months of more ruling for the sake of ‘being able to step down with dignity’.

Egypt has always seen very modern Arabic country. I don’t think a fundamentalist religious government is likely there.

Don’t forget that the only reason why Ayatollah got power in Iran was due to the direct manipulation of the local government by USA forces and other actions by other western countries trying to create a political regime favorable to to western leader’s policies.

Also don’t forget that Iran itself had massive protests during the last election protesting the government, which was savagely put down and largely ignored by media in the USA due to the fact that it was not a politically expedient for Obama to address the Iran issue at the time.

Capitalism and Liberty is leading to massive political upheaval in the region. People in Egypt and other places are finally begin to understand who is the real reason for their economic woes. The established governments are the ones that favor Islamic fundamentalism since they use it as a basis for their authority.

Abhilash Nambiar February 1, 2011 at 5:17 pm

It is difficult to judge the political climate of any country without spending time in it. But it is also not very easy to judge from inside it. When Islamist militants assassinated Anwar Sadat in 1981, they expected that it would lead to instability and a power struggle among warring factions. The kind of thing you have in Iraq. And the kind of thing that has been happening in Afghanistan every since the Taliban was ousted. But much to their disappointment it did not happen then.

Quiet the contrary, the power of the secular, all-be-it oppressive regime was only reaffirmed when the then unknown Hosni Mubarak took over and brutally suppressed the Islamist militants. Now that it is his time to go, I think it is reasonable to be hopeful that there is something better waiting within the social structure to replace him. Maybe power will get less monopolized and more decentralized. That is a good thing for the free flow of ideas, when power is not concentrated. Centralized power is becoming so 20th century anyway.

A Liberal in Lakeview February 1, 2011 at 10:52 pm

“Now that it is his time to go, I think it is reasonable to be hopeful that there is something better waiting within the social structure to replace him.”

Abhilash, perhaps there is something better than Mubarak. Kkruschev was better than Stalin. Andrew Johnson was better, barely, than Abraham Lincoln, and only in a very limited respect.

Still, would not all experience throughout the world suggest that the statists who replace Hosni and his crew will be perverse? Further, is this a revolt against the fundamental problem, statism?

Well, no. At most it’s a revolt against the symptoms of statism.

If the “social structure” of Egypt has something good within it that would tend to work against the transfer of volition from individuals to statists, then there must be, at minimum, (i) weak or absent faith in Islam, which is socialistic and requires Islamic statism, if only to implement the zakat, (ii) widespread regard for private property rights, (iii) widespread regard for personal liberty.

But what evidence of these features is to be found?

There is no reason to expect significant improvement with the next clique of rulers. They will treat the bodies of their subjects as if those bodies were their personal property, and there will be no shortage of hangers-on looking to be paid back for favors performed while bringing those new rulers to power. It works the same way everywhere that statism is the dominant code of ethics for relations between individuals.

Abhilash Nambiar February 1, 2011 at 11:14 pm

Agreed. Statism is not going to disappear. But I do not see Islam to be the reason. Statism is after all also a problem in nations without an Islamic heritage.

Mitchell Powell February 2, 2011 at 11:52 pm

True enough, Nambiar. Indeed, the only government in recent history to engage in a wholesale rejection of statism is a country with a strong Islamic heritage: Somalia. Just as Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Atheists may be anything from libertarians to totalitarians, so also Muslims may fill the whole spectrum.

A Liberal in Lakeview February 3, 2011 at 5:32 pm

“Statism is after all also a problem in nations without an Islamic heritage.”

Indeed, Abhilash, but please note that I conceded as much with “all experience throughout the world”.

Unfortunately, Mitchell Powell’s remark is misguided and a red herring, too. (Read: “Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Atheists.”) Whether or not Christianity, Judaism, or Hinduism are are statist is irrelevant to the conclusion that Egyptians are belabored with bad religion such that the prospects for a good outcome of the currrent revolt are remote.

Of course, atheism is intrinsically not statist, and Powell’s example of Somalia, if represented accurately by him, tends to support my case, not to undermine it.

Deefburger February 1, 2011 at 10:31 am

When the basis of power is a belief in a positive right to power, all the people need to do to remove the power is to remove the belief in it from their minds. Revolution happens when this removal of belief becomes universal within the populous at large. Everything else is positioning and politics, and ultimately is secondary to the act of giving up belief in power.

God bless the Egyptian People and I hope they do not create a new belief in power to replace the old one. There is a subtle difference between belief in power outside one’s self and belief in the power within when democracy is considered: Belief in self results in the election of representatives; Belief in power outside the self results in the election of rulers.

The_Orlonater February 1, 2011 at 11:05 am

As much as I probably will be flamed for this, they probably will choose just another crappy government that’s hostile to free trade, promotes “social justice”, is interventionist, etc. I hope I’m wrong.

nate-m February 1, 2011 at 1:17 pm

If they don’t, it will be forced on them by international pressure. Invasion, even.

A Texas Guy February 1, 2011 at 3:01 pm

Why would you be flamed? History has proven you right. People would rather feel comfortable than be free. The Egyptians are no different, and while some of the protesters may actually want, press for, and desire liberty and freedom. People would still rather choose something with which they’re familiar and so elect another government like you described OR one in which it is given the power to do the actions you described.

The Anti-Gnostic February 1, 2011 at 10:41 am

God bless the Egyptian people. Unfortunately, I think the attitude gets to be that there’s this ‘wealth’ that the despots have stolen (true enough) and the solution, it follows, is to redistribute the ‘wealth’ so everybody can be happy. After generations of oligarchy, people tend to forget how wealth is actually created. Hopefully I’m wrong.

Juliusz February 1, 2011 at 11:00 am

This article seems to be a bit naive in respect of “people’s will”. I knew few Arabs and ALL of them had heads full of socialist ideas. Unfortunately crowd usually demands removal of ruling class because later one steals without giving opportunity to others to do the same. Crowd usually demands opportunity to steal for them as well. On top of that I’m very sceptical about spontaneous mass protest-history teaches us them most of them are directed, orchestrated (or use any other accurate term) by forces hidden behind, not seen at that moment (often old supporting empires, organisations etc).
This article seems to be a bit naive in respect of “people’s will”. I knew few Arabs and ALL of them had heads full of socialist ideas. Unfortunately crowd usually demands removal of ruling class because later one steals without giving opportunity to others to do the same. Crowd usually demands opportunity to steal for them as well. On top of that I’m very sceptical about spontaneous mass protest-history teaches us them most of them are directed, orchestrated (or use any other accurate term) by forces hidden behind, not seen at that moment (often old supporting empires, organisations, fighting fractions within secret services etc). For example:
“Poland, Romania, Hungary, East Germany, Bulgaria, and Czechoslovakia all experienced dramatic meltdowns, while the Soviet regime, supportive of these systems since the end of the Second World War, sat by helplessly and watched”
Polish Solidarnosc(Solidarity) movement was completely infiltrated and in huge part manipulated (some say fully controlled ) by secret police Sluzba Bezpieczenstwa as more clever members both of PZPR (Polish communist party) and SB knew red system wont last due to pure economical reasons therefore they were preparing themselves to take over power in other ways (media, banks, industry that would belong to them as private entertainments instead of state-controlled ones) and played “social unrests” brilliantly in particular way-to serf them well helping to reach their goals.
In Romania part of Securitate’s (Romanian secret service) elites got fed up with Nicolae Ceausescu taking whole cake without sharing it much therefore they staged peoples uprising and physically eliminating opposite fraction within Securitate and quickly sentencing old dictator to death so he could not speak.

The_Orlonater February 1, 2011 at 11:07 am

Right on, and besides this is Mises.org, I didn’t really think that it would be a hot-bed for pro-democracy, pro-populist ideas. Mises himself wasn’t fond of public opinion…

Anthony February 1, 2011 at 3:07 pm

Public opinion is fine when everyone else is not forced to comply with it…

RTB February 1, 2011 at 9:21 pm

Basically agree. To add, I think it’s easy to want to oust a dictator, a single man with a face who robs and steals for himself and his cronies and spreads some around to corporate and banker “friends”. It’s a whole ‘nother thing when it comes to despotic Democracies. Give people the vote and they’ll join right on in the plunder. Really only two likely scenarios here. An Islamic State or a socialist statist democracy. Both destined for a bad end.

David Jones February 1, 2011 at 11:08 am

I personally like the Jefferson – Washington neutrality approach to foreign affairs. Opinions and prognostications on the outcome in Egypt are numerous. Mine: I think this uprising is fueled by the radical Muslims who have a 90% chance of controlling the government at the end of the crisis. Yes, the current dictator is not good. Yes, he will be replaced by something worse, and the people will suffer more than they do now. I do not think anyone in the area but the Israelis have an understanding of the principles of freedom sufficient to freely elect a government that will allow them to be free. They will elect people that will enslave them. I would love a neutral response by the USA but we will not get one. We will intervene (perhaps under the table). The bottom line is that this is a tragedy in the making. If you think the Soviet crisis ended well (debatable) – this will not even end as well as that. I hope I’m wrong.

Eric February 1, 2011 at 1:02 pm

What makes you think that the Israelis live under a government that provides them with freedom? They pay rather high taxes and if it wasn’t for US foreign aid, they would be a rather poor nation (assuming they continued to spend at the same rate they do now).

Mike Elmore February 1, 2011 at 1:18 pm

Jones, you and a few get it when you recognize that this is fueled by an ideology called Islam and the rest of you are naive if you thinks this is about freedom and we know it. I’ve had this conversation many times before with people that indeed have a good grasp of economics but are totally ignorant to what drives the politics of this area and again it’s Islam. Thinking that there is ever going to be an economic model, that you are familiar with, that’s going to work while the government is run under Islam law is not only silly but is a moral and ethical failure of the West to even understand. What drives this part of the world, again is Islam. The writer, I believe, is wrong to the politics of the ME when he compares the Soviet and Egyptian government. It may make him feel good that somehow all of this is going to make mankind live in peace but this thinking is just what is wrong with the multiculturalists, political correct moral equivalence thinkers. If this revolution happens get ready for county call the Islamic Republic of Egypt and believe me this gutter ideology is not compatible with democracy or economic principles as we see it in the West.You are not wrong unfortunatly. I don’t want to hear how this is only radical Muslims and not the peace loving Muslims because the only radical Muslims are the ones not blowing things up the rest are practicing there faith as set out in the Koran..have a nice day… elmore

Junta February 1, 2011 at 1:53 pm

Lew Rockwell and friends believe that the bane of the ME is US interventionism. To them, Islam is merely a buzzword used by fear mongering neocons who refuse to acknowledge terrorism as an effect of Us foreign policy. You’ll have a better luck banging your head against a wall than trying to convince your opponents otherwise, Elmore.

Anthony February 1, 2011 at 3:36 pm

Junta,

The degree to which otherwise rational people demonize and fear Islam is truly boggling. People who are presumably normal in other aspects of their lives have convinced themselves that all Muslims are part of a monolithic, worldwide conspiracy and that this justifies any and all actions to stop them. People say (and believe) things like “there is no such thing as a moderate Muslim” and “if we nuked every Muslim city it would only be self defense”. (I am not suggesting you believe these things)

It would indeed be difficult to convince people here that somehow, unlike every other group in history, Muslims are unique, universally fanatical, and not subject to reason.

I will ask you this: Can you conceive of any rational reason why people in the Middle East would hate America because of its actions, rather than its religions? If the US government supported a brutal dictator in your country (financially and militarily) would you be willing to forget about it?

I find the theory that people hate America for its (government`s) actions much more likely than the theory that people hate America for its “freedom”.

Junta February 1, 2011 at 3:55 pm

“The degree to which otherwise rational people demonize and fear Islam is truly boggling.”

It really isn’t. Not unless you think there is something mundane about bronze-aged screeds being the bedrock of a society’s political structure, legal system, and social norms.

“(I am not suggesting you believe these things)”

Neither does Ayaan Hirsi Ali.

But then again she’s probably some shadow neocon shill whoring for Israel /sarcasm.

Anthony February 1, 2011 at 10:42 pm

Junta,

You really don’t seem to get it. The bible (a bronze aged screed, of course) is by many accounts the bedrock of the US’s political structure, legal system and social norms. I’ll bet you consider it pretty mundane that the government there promotes “family values” based on the Judeo-Christian model of the family.

As for Ayaan Hirsi Ali, it is not as if Muslims have a monopoly on death threats or assassination. It wasn’t that long ago that abortion doctors in some parts of the States had to be afraid to go outside.

p.s. You didn’t answer my questions…

augusto February 2, 2011 at 8:57 am

“It really isn’t. Not unless you think there is something mundane about bronze-aged screeds being the bedrock of a society’s political structure, legal system, and social norms.”

Well, Rothbard traces the origins of libertarian philosophy back to medieval spanish monks…

Islamic science was superior to anything catholics did from the 700 all the way to the 1400…

They aren’t much worse than everyone else.

newson February 2, 2011 at 12:35 am
augusto February 4, 2011 at 8:38 am

also in the news: Egyptian youth uses twitter, facebook to organize demonstrations. ;-)

newson February 4, 2011 at 10:31 pm

touché.

noah February 1, 2011 at 11:22 am

If you’ve never read it, it’s a good time to read Eric Hoffer’s “The True Believer: Thoughts on the Nature of Mass Movements” (published sixty years ago). If you have read it, it’s a good time to read it again.

Tyrone Dell February 1, 2011 at 6:41 pm

I second this suggestion.

AnnaChristoff February 1, 2011 at 11:41 am

First off, I am tired of hearing that the “digital revolution” is responsible for connecting youths around the world to the “sights and sounds” of modernity. It’s connecting them mostly to Facebook prattle and other total cyber trash and wastes of time, ultimately promoting more conformity than diversity of opinion. In any case, intelligent and knowledge-hungry populations the world over existed long before the Internet. The Middle Eastern educated have always followed international newspapers and media; all well-educated Arabs, Persians and Turks I have known/know were quite sharp. As one who regards the Internet culture as mostly a negative one, I find Mr. Rockwell’s dreamy hommage to the digital aspect of this uprising a bit silly.

Secondly, I think the US should stay completely out of this uprising in Egypt. The US has done enough damage in the Middle East in the name of “promoting democracy”, thank you very much.

Egypt, like most of the Muslim Arab (let us not forget the Coptic element, of course) countries, is not culturally suited for laissez -faire Capitalism on the American model–the ultra-free, anti-State model that “we” once were. This does not mean that those countries “must” be Socialist or ruled by theocrats or thug-o-crats. To my mind, the best solution for the Mideast countries is monarchy.

A Western-savvy international ruler of outstanding historical background, who embodies the strong cultural-religious symbolism so potent in these countries, but who, educated in Western rule of law, parliamentary processes, and the necessity of capitalism/free trade and productivity, would instill his country with the proper “democratic”, aspect. This is to my mind the best solution. A self-made man/woman type could be his premier.

Israel, meanwhile, should mind its own business and tend to its Palestinian problem.The US should also quit the Mideast entirely, and simply maintain commercial relations with those countries. Let East be East and West be West and you will have peace–far more of it, at least, than what all this neo-con nonsense/fanatical furor across the region is perpetrating now.

So…in short…I remain somewhat skeptical of what the ultimate change in Egypt will amount to. There must be a philosophical revolution, but not of the nature K Street envisions

Like the other writer wrote above, I too “fear” that Murabak will be replaced by some home-grown socialist-populist who will continue the trend of statist corruption. I worry about this more than the Islamic, so-called, element. My fear is that a new crop of losers will be put into power along “Hugo Chavez” lines, popular simply because of their hatred of the US, and veiling their sticky-finger rule with all the usual sloganeering about “the people” blah blah blah

nate-m February 1, 2011 at 1:54 pm

First off, I am tired of hearing that the “digital revolution” is responsible for connecting youths around the world to the “sights and sounds” of modernity. It’s connecting them mostly to Facebook prattle and other total cyber trash and wastes of time, ultimately promoting more conformity than diversity of opinion. In any case, intelligent and knowledge-hungry populations the world over existed long before the Internet. The Middle Eastern educated have always followed international newspapers and media; all well-educated Arabs, Persians and Turks I have known/know were quite sharp. As one who regards the Internet culture as mostly a negative one, I find Mr. Rockwell’s dreamy hommage to the digital aspect of this uprising a bit silly.

The advantage to the internet is that you no longer dependent on regulated media or government outlets for international information. You can get information directly from other individuals. Not only you tend to get more accurate information, it’s much easier to remember.

Remember when Islamic extremists tried to detonate homemade bombs on buses in London, but they were not correctly made and the explosions didn’t cause any damage? I do.. because I was talking to somebody from India and Great Britain and the guy I was talking to had a friend that was on his way to work on a bus on that route that was bombed.

I’ve gone to websites and watched things unfold in Iran when they tried to fight against their government there and were completely ignored by the USA government and media. I also know more accurate information, much quicker, about the Egypt protests then 24 hour news networks. I knew about the internet black outs immediately. I knew that prisoners were _released_ from prisons (not broke out like the talking heads on CNN say) so the government could videotape their rioting and use that for international propaganda.

Right now realtime communication with the outside world the world and internal organizing is one of the Egyption’s people’s best defense against a violent crackdown by the military.

AnnaChristoff February 1, 2011 at 2:47 pm

I agree that the mainstream media is very poor these days, but I still do not believe life or knowledge or the cause of truth is improved watching 24 hour a day “real time” information or weeding through a dozen blogs to piece together bits and pieces of “the real story”. It still takes long, analytical, polished, probing, mature journalism/non fiction eloquence to write as accurate an account of events such as what is unfolding in Egypt as possible.

And besides, look at the big picture of what is going on. The US is wasting its young blood and its money waging wars in the Middle East, a world-wide economic disaster has spread across continents like a bad plague, illiterates are graduating from schools, and people elect morons to office. Granted, all this can happen any era, any time, any place. But to hype the Internet as being on the forefront of so much information-revolution….what has really been the net effect? What is “the Internet” really providing in the midst of all of this, but people–often very intelligent like the ones on this site–screaming back and forth at each other: “I-told-you -so!”

Having said all this, I am happy to have sites like Mises.org around and ones like it. But the writers here were /are already professional writers or professionals in other fields. The Internet is still too much of a crap shoot for me.

nate-m February 4, 2011 at 11:15 pm

It still takes long, analytical, polished, probing, mature journalism/non fiction eloquence to write as accurate an account of events such as what is unfolding in Egypt as possible.

Yep. Now it’s possible for people to do that without a millions of dollars and a state-sanctioned media outlet.

And besides, look at the big picture of what is going on. The US is wasting its young blood and its money waging wars in the Middle East, a world-wide economic disaster has spread across continents like a bad plague, illiterates are graduating from schools, and people elect morons to office.

I don’t think anything you said is anything new. I think the key difference is the level of awareness we have about what is screwed up in the world.

Just think back 30 years ago… what sort of coverage would you of seen about Egypt?

Would of it been even possible for the Egyption people to decentrally organize themselves in a manner that would of allowed them to combat a dictator in a effective manner?

What is “the Internet” really providing in the midst of all of this, but people–often very intelligent like the ones on this site–screaming back and forth at each other: “I-told-you -so!”

It provides free access to information and unregulated communication between individuals. I don’t give a flying fuck what people post in replied on ‘news blogs’ or foxnews.com or anything like that. I couldn’t give a crap about any of that. The whole Democrat vs Republicans and Liberal vs Conservative bickering is a farce constructed and designed purposely to keep people from actually examining the statist system objectively.

To put it another way…

When my father was a child he did not even have indoor plumbing. Spotty electricity, homemade wells, and out houses. A small amount of TV channels that stayed on for only a few moments. Local newspapers only. Etc etc. This is just in the USA in the late 50′s to the 60′s.

And even up through the early 1990′s only the wealthiest people of the wealthiest nations could afford to live in places that had access to any substantial information. And even then the vast majority of it was out of date by 50 years or more. Any sort of scientific literature was hopelessly behind the times as soon as it wormed it’s way through through the publishing system and made it to the universities.

Nowadays all you need to have is a reliable internet connection and a grasp of the English language (or other major Language) and you have virtually untapped access to information. Anything you want to know. If you want to know what it is like to live in India or China all you have to do is find somebody to ask. It’s just all depends on your personal ability and drive. Everything from how to rebuild a motor, purify water, programming, architectural design to the history of economics and liberal thought is out there. Everything. You just have to go and find it. If don’t mind breaking a few copyright laws then it opens up even wider.

Don’t fall for the bullshit that it’s all about Twitter and Facebook. I can head out to ‘thepiratebay’ and hidden behind torrents of ‘howto please a women’ and ‘unlock your inner potential’ style books I can download a reasonably sized library of very serious medical text books and resources. It’s all out there. You just have to want to take it. It’s yours.

Not to mention the tremendous boon it is to businesses.

The internet is causing a revolution in our society. It’s right up there with gunpowder and the printing press in terms of major advances that have changed human society. I think it’s going to be difficult to overestimate the impact it is having on the world.

RTB February 1, 2011 at 9:32 pm

Interesting your idea that Monarchy is best for that region. Very sad. Maybe one day they’ll catch up. Also very sad is that if the monarch you described came to power he/she would most likely be quickly assassinated amid cries of “My God is better than yours!”.

Poptech February 2, 2011 at 5:00 am

Don’t you know? Future wars will be fought with this superior communication “technology”,

“On My Tweet, Unleash Hell!”

After the battle everyone friends each other. ROFLMAO

John P. Cunnane February 2, 2011 at 8:02 am

That is pretty funny, nice job.

fundamentalist February 1, 2011 at 1:22 pm

I agree with posters who fear that the Muslim Brotherhood will take over Egypt. Few are old enough to remember the revolution in Iran. Khomeini and his crowd promised freedom, democracy and wealth, too. Instead, the Iranian people got far greater persecution and mass murder. The Shah may have murdered thousands, but Khomeini murdered hundreds of thousands. Today, Iranian per capita gdp is 1/4 what it was under the Shah. That’s mainly because Khomeini adopted socialism as Islamic economics.

Following Iran, the Muslim Brotherhood also adopted socialism as Islamic. And all other Islamic groups, like Al Qaeda, are splinters off the Muslim Brotherhood, which organized during WWI. The MB is promising democracy, freedom and prosperity to the people because that’s what they want to hear. The MB is the largest and best organized group in Egypt and is orchestrating the demonstrations. As soon as they get rid of Mubarak, the MB will take over and the reign, and rain of terror will begin.

I saw an interview with some Egyptian Christians and they wanted Mubarak to remain in power because he has kept MB persecution of Christians to a minimal level. Christians now fear that with Mubarak gone they will have no one to protect them. This happened in Iraq, too. Saddam Hussein, for all his evil, protected the minority Christians from radical Muslims. After his capture Christians have suffered horribly at the hands of Muslims and many have immigrated.

A Liberal in Lakeview February 3, 2011 at 6:39 pm

fundamentalist,

You may find it interesting to learn what some Muslims in North America, esp. in Illinois, have been telegraphing to the public about their political plans.

Here in Illinois we have something called The Council of Islamic Organizations of Greater Chicago which has openly confessed not only an intent to establish an Islamic state but also their efforts to do so. For an example of the latter: The CIOGC is planning another Muslim ACTION! Day to ingratiate theirselves and young Muslims among the political class of the province.

Alert Christians should have little trouble figuring out what motivated the Muslims of The CIOGC to chose the date that they did for the first ever Muslim ACTION! Day. That one was held on a Thursday in May 2009, about, oh, thirty-nine days after Easter, as reckoned by Christians of the Latin Ecclesia and those Christians who follow the same, or substantially same, liturgical calendar.

Now, would you care to guess what date was chosen for the “3rd Annual Illinois Muslim ACTION! Day”? How about Wednesday, the 9th of March?

Muslims from all over Illinois will drive down to the state capitol to meet with legislators and advocate for a variety of important issues.

Issues:

1. Education
2. Access to Healthcare
3. Arabic in schools

The CIOGC is speaking loudly and clearly: We Muslims will erase Christianity from Illinois and substitute our own cult for it.

See also the website of The Central Zakat Committee for The Institution of Zakat, available for free download in PDF. The CZC, a committee of the CIOGC, not only describes zakat as “one of the five fundamental obligations of Islam” but also informs the reader that

in the In the absence of an Islamic State, various Islamic organizations have taken it upon themselves voluntarily to collect and disburse the Zakat in the communities.

It should go without saying that a Muslim is a person who thinks not only that there are five fundamental obligations of Islam but also that there is a fundamental obligation to submit to Islam.

So, while insinuating theirselves into the racket that is Illinoisan politics, the Muslims will build up on the side the machinery of their socialistic redistribution program. But the story gets even better. Read the preamble of Illinois’ constitution.

We, the People of the State of Illinois—grateful to Almighty God for
the civil, political and religious liberty which He has permitted us to enjoy
and seeking His blessing upon our endeavors—in order to provide for the
health, safety and welfare of the people
; maintain a representative and
orderly government; eliminate poverty and inequality; assure legal, social
and economic justice
; provide opportunity for the fullest development
of the individual; insure domestic tranquility; provide for the common
defense; and secure the blessings of freedom and liberty to ourselves and
our posterity—do ordain and establish this Constitution for the State of
Illinois.

So, how do you like that? Like other provinces of the USA, the State of Illinois is a caring theocracy devoted to “the fullest development of the individual”. Just what an ambitious Islamic statist needs to grease the skids to the paradise of an Islamic state of Illinois. Good thing for the Muslims that the preamble doesn’t have any fleas in it like the phrase “In the Name of the Most Holy Trinity”, as does the Constitution of Ireland. That would an unwelcome complication in their political project.

A Liberal in Lakeview February 3, 2011 at 6:50 pm
Jon February 1, 2011 at 4:02 pm

was said:
” Today, Iranian per capita gdp is 1/4 what it was under the Shah. That’s mainly because Khomeini adopted socialism as Islamic economics.”
Of course, the immoral ‘sanctions’ demanded by apartheid ‘Israel’ and their shills have to be considered here. True, socialism (let’s call it what it is, Marxism) is an over-arching problem; but even if Iran had a truly free capitalist system, sanctions would be in place and continue to cripple economic development.

Should an ‘unfavorable’ government end up ruling Egypt, watch as sanctions are applied … bet on it. The US should let the cards fall where they may, it’s the Egyptians’ country and only they should determine who comprises their government.

Egypt, already very Marxist, with the blatant corruption that is always part & parcel to socialism/Marxism, is what the protests are really about, though the protestors may not realize it. Should Egypt go further down the road of ‘socialism’, there will be the inevitable increased economic chaos. That will bring about even more protests once the Egyptians finger the culprit.

It’s their country, the US and ‘Israel’ (essentially one and the same) should stay out.

- Jon

Mark February 1, 2011 at 5:06 pm

It strikes me that marxism provides a good narrative for the motivation of sheeple, but it strikes me that egypt is nothing more sophisticated than feudalism–though perhaps all marxism is.

augusto February 2, 2011 at 6:46 am

Before calling Iranian government marxist, remember it’s the only country in the world where you can legally sell (some of) your internal organs for transplans! ;-)

fundamentalist February 2, 2011 at 10:30 am

Jon, US sanctions began only after the embassy take over, but they really didn’t matter because no one in the government wanted trade with the US and the US was the only nation to apply sanctions. All of Europe traded freely with Iran until about two years ago. And China, Russia, all of the Middle East and many other nations don’t go along with the sanctions. The decline in per capita gdp happened because of socialism. About 5 years ago the state decided to roll back some of the socialism and sell off state-owned businesses, but for the most part those went to cronies of the government for a pittance. In other words, high placed people stole them.

Egyptian women used to never wear scarves. Now watch the videos of the demonstrations. There are few women in the crowds and those all have scarves on. That means they are supporters of the MB. Egypt will go the way of Iran.

Also, keep in mind that Mubarak has been a US supporter and friend of Israel in name only. He has used the state-owned media to inflame anti-American and anti-Israeli passions for decades. During the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan the Egyptian state-owned media accused US troops of raping women at will, giving poison candy to children, and using citizens for target practice. Mubarak turned the Egyptian people into the most anti-American people in the entire world. Much of the opposition to Mubarak comes from the MB portraying him as an American stooge, and therefore as anti-Islamic.

newson February 2, 2011 at 7:00 pm

the war on scarves isn’t going that well in afghanistan. perhaps everybody should just look after their own wardrobe.

agdrummer February 1, 2011 at 4:37 pm

IF and When we americans come to a conclusion that our system of voting has become corrupt beyond all repair,that is essentially what will be the same tipping point as egypt. High unemployment…check….high youth unemployment check, increaseing authortarianism…check, increaseing food prices….check. No way to vote the bums out ??? time will tell.

Mark February 1, 2011 at 5:04 pm

When there more than 50% of people are getting more than they are giving due to democratic redistribution of wealth, the productive may at some point decide to flex their muscles a bit, and obviously voting will not be a useful mechanism to a productive minority.

Having said that, it doesn’t appear to take much pushback to scare the hell out of statist politicians. These former 60s radicals are clearly not able to take as much as they dished out when they were seizing power.

RTB February 1, 2011 at 9:38 pm

The fiction that we have a voice through a vote keeps the majority very passive, indeed.

Mark February 1, 2011 at 5:00 pm

Whatever they do is their business as far as I am concerned, and we ought to arrange our affairs so we are not dependent on a pro-american government in the middle east. My guess is that these uprisings are the result of muslim grass roots activism, and the result will be the same as with iran where a pro western tyrant is replaced by muslim tyrants.

So, I don’t see libertarian urges or a hunger for freedom as the cause here–though the masses may mistakenly think they are not trading one tyrant for another.

But, its their business and we should stop providing them bribe money to the tune of billions a year.

Abhilash Nambiar February 1, 2011 at 5:43 pm

I thought this would be the appropriate time and place to quote some of my favorite lines from
Murray Rothbard’s ‘Conceived in Liberty’

Why? Why revolution? This question is asked in fascination by contemporary observers and historians of every revolution in history. What were the reasons, the “true” motives, behind any given revolution?

The very search by observers and historians for purity and unmixed motives in a revolution betrays an unrealistic naivete. Revolutions are mighty upheavals made by a mass of people, people who are willing to rupture the settled habits of a lifetime, including especially the habit of obedience to an existing government. They are made by people willing to turn from the narrow pursuits of their daily lives to battle vigorously and even violently together in a more general cause. Because a revolution is a sudden upheaval by masses of men, one cannot treat the motives of every participant as identical, nor can one treat a revolution as somehow planned and ordered in advance. On the contrary, one of the major characteristics of a revolution is its dynamism, its rapid and accelerating movement in one of several competing directions. Indeed, the enormous sense of exhilaration or of fear, depending on one’s personal values and one’s place in the social structure) generated by a revolution is precisely due to its unfreezing of the political and social order, its smashing of the old order, of the fixed and relatively stagnant political structure, its transvaluation of values, its replacement of a reigning fixity with a sense of openness and dynamism. Hope, especially among those submerged by the existing system, replaces hopelessness and despair.

Sione February 1, 2011 at 5:51 pm

All this complaining about the fact that more and more people like to correspond and get their news from the web these days… Gotta love the criticism that most web content is poor or rubbish or non-ideal in some way. Hello? Why do you let mainstream media off with a free pass? Most of that is poor, rubbish or non-ideal. How about allowing the newer medium a fair analysis here?

I have found much more accurate and timely information over the web, than on the old TV or radio networks. Also I can always email people I already know and trust to request information and update. That completely by-passes the entire chain of editorialisation, censorship, propaganda, official bias, institutionalised ignorance and the like inhabiting the mainstream.

Some of you need think much more carefully before critiquing.

Sione

Sione February 1, 2011 at 5:55 pm

By the way, I just have to point out that there is waaaay too much of this “we gotta do summit” going on here. We? Who are you talking about exactly? Are any of the “we” on this thread some sort of royalty? If not, then quit with the “we” nonsense.

Sione

Mark February 1, 2011 at 6:43 pm

I consider myself some sort of royalty and one of the ‘we’.

Sione February 2, 2011 at 1:17 pm

Well then your highness, where are your subjects? Who is it that obeys your commands? Where, pray tell, are all the loyal subjects you control?

Sione

Poptech February 1, 2011 at 8:27 pm

Three cheers for the destruction and theft of private property! I fail to see the similarities with the American revolution in Egypt nor the emergence of a George Washington. When the Egyptians elect their new socialist or theocratic ruler will Lew write a new piece? Maybe I missed it but can someone show me the pictures of Egyptian protesters holding signs for liberty and laissez-faire capitalism?

niku February 2, 2011 at 1:26 am

I live in India, and the vast majority of people here will fight libertarian ideas tooth and nail when the issue comes up. Socialism seeps whole of the culture here.
Here is Mahatma Gandhi:

“Real socialism has been handed down to us by our ancestors who taught: ‘All land belongs to Gopal; where then is the boundary line? Man is the maker of that line and can therefore, unmake it.’ Gopal literally means shepherd; it also means God. In modern language it means the State, i.e. the People.”

(Harijan, 2nd Jan., 1937; Quoted in India of My Dreams, Navjivan Publishing House, Ahmedabad, 1947, 1959.)
Obviously the people of Egypt should be left alone to decide what they want, but almost certainly, a new anti-U.S. government will not be any freer.

Poptech February 2, 2011 at 4:53 am

Ah yes but India is a democracy and that is supposed to mean freedom, how can this be? (sarc)

niku February 2, 2011 at 11:41 pm

India is quite free right now, perhaps freer than any other third world country. But the support to liberty is merely political, socialism runs amok in the culture. If liberty falls in the West, it will fall here too.

Bala February 11, 2011 at 10:09 pm

Oh please!!! Don’t scare me by telling the truth.

augusto February 2, 2011 at 6:55 am

This quote seems very open to interpretation, relatively easy to put a libertarian twist on it.

niku February 2, 2011 at 1:57 am

It could be freer, though, if the current government is made up of thugs.

Pinoy Liberal February 2, 2011 at 2:42 am

I agree with Richard Spencer. Mubarak’s been the dictator for 30 years, why only complain about it now. Truth is, it’s hardly about ‘democracy’ and freedom, people just complaining because of uncertain economic conditions. In the end, the sheep just want to be safe, yet Rockwell romanticizes the situation with his populist rhetoric.

http://www.alternativeright.com/main/blogs/malinvestments/the-bernanke-riots/

John B February 2, 2011 at 5:41 am

“Because, after all, it is the right of a people — is it not? — to alter and abolish the form of government under which they are forced to live.”
Sounds distinctly collectivist to me and may be an indication of the blinkers that may be distorting your view.
The world does not run to North American norms all the time, and there may be far, far worse to come.
2010 Cairo is not 1979 Tehran but there may be similarities to follow.

augusto February 2, 2011 at 7:00 am

Out of silly curiosity, are there any descendants of the pharaos alive today? It would be kind of fun to watch someone suggest Egypt should restore its former glory by returning to a teochratical monarchy led by the pharao… I don’t think anyone would buy into that, but it would be fun.

John P. Cunnane February 2, 2011 at 8:20 am

First of all, it’s fun to break things, set things on fire and yell, kids do it all the time. Secondly, breaking the law can be exhilarating and chicks dig rebels. Thirdly, most people like a good vent.

The unfortunate truth is that I do not see people longing to be free, here or in Eygpt. There are people like that but it does not appear to be the view of the “compact majority” anywhere.

We need one more shot at it, one more new place. Outer space and the offshore floating Liberalville ideas seem unlikely to occur during my lifetime. If only a people would agree to vacate a land on which we could set up shop (we can’t invade due to our non agression principles). I would like a nice climate and access to water (both fresh and salt (for trade)).

What I am saying is I feel pessimistic about the state of human affairs due to the condition of the human mind. I don’t see a hue and cry for what the royal “we” are envisioning.

augusto February 2, 2011 at 9:11 am

Functioning floating cities aren’t really that expensive. The reason they don’t exist is people do not want to live in floating cities.

Take for example the RMS Queen Elisabeth 2. It cost 420 million pounds. It has a capacity for over 2500 people (actually, 1800 passengers + 1000 crew).

This means if you can get 2500 people, and each contributes a mere 170 thousand pounds, you have a floating city.

Now, put three of those ships together, you have a floating city of 7500, which is a very reasonably sized community. You mean there are no 7500 people who want to live offshore?

If you’re concerned about energy, you can buy a mature gas platform for about 50 million. Put the two together and there you have it. The economy would probably be based on gambling. The only problem is that Lbertopia would use gold as currency and you wouldn’t want to store gold on a ship that any other country could relatively easily invade.

Why isn’t it done? Because people don’t want to :-)

augusto February 2, 2011 at 9:17 am

obviously, I’m just kidding ;-)

The_Orlonater February 2, 2011 at 11:06 am

I don’t want to live on a boat anyway.

J.K. Baltzersen February 2, 2011 at 10:06 am

Fuad II of Egypt is still alive. He was the last King of Egypt – thus far. The dynasties of Ancient Egypt was something else, however.

Fuad II was an infant king. It is interesting that his father is to have said:

The whole world is in revolt. Soon there will be only five Kings left—the King of England, the King of Spades, the King of Clubs, the King of Hearts, and the King of Diamonds.

Since his (Farouk I) abdication, almost 60 years ago, there has been no King of England (strictly, constitutionally speaking there has been no Queen of England either, as that is not one of her titles), but there have been a lot of other kings (at least compared to his five), and the Kingdom of Spain has been restored.

augusto February 2, 2011 at 10:32 am

Well, not the same as a the heir of a Pharaoh, who could point to the Pyramids and say “This is what we could accomplish together.”

The world is full of royalty in exile, though.

Thanks for the wikipedia link!

Sione February 2, 2011 at 1:23 pm

Breaking news. The violence and looting appears to be the work of govt security services. Seems the tactic has backfired and some have been caught and identified (the idiots still had their badges and ID on their person). The Army did not shoot (not so far anyway).

Sione

fundamentalist February 2, 2011 at 5:40 pm

Recall what democracy brought to Gaza – Hamas.

Mitchell Powell February 2, 2011 at 11:46 pm

Surprise! When you put people in boxes, cut off trade from them, and oppress the heck out of them they tend to elect people hostile to your government! Whoda thunk such a thing?

The case of Hamas is more a predictable reaction to putting people in boxes than it is of democracy. If your goal is to keep people oppressed, of course democracy is a bad idea for them.

Tom February 2, 2011 at 10:57 pm

Opposition to Mubarek’s totalitarian control may be well founded. But it is hypocritical to judge Mubarek as a dictator and then to ignore the dictatorial nature of the Islamic theocracy likely to follow his exit. What kind of governance did Mubarek suppress? Honor killings, Jizya(slave tax), hostility to the idea of women’s rights and the violent oppression of Jews, Christians and other non-Muslim religions. These are integral components to Sharia. Does anyone out there think this is less totalitarian? Democracy in an Islamic state is going to result in Islamic governance. The question them becomes how Islamic? There are 80 million people in Egypt. Conservative statistics would have the radical population of that country to be 5 %. If that is true then where are the moderate candidates? Why are the only choices for leadership dictators or Ayatollahs? Why is the ordained spokesman for the protests, Baradei not rejecting the endorsement of the Muslim Brotherhood? Shouldn’t he be avoiding having his Laureate title used as a moderating tool for a bunch of radicals in the middle of the largest political crisis in the last 100 years? How about using that Laureate platform to call for the end to honor killings, slave taxes, the repression of women’s rights and the end to religious oppression of Jews, Christians and non-muslims under Islam. Remove these components from the religion and then a moderate position would actually be possible. If the Muslim Brotherhood takes control of Egypt the likelihood that other countries with like minded hostilities toward Israel and the USA try and actualize their hatred becomes much more likely. Revolution is only a good thing if it takes the country to a better place, if it ends up going the way of Iran the only way it is better is for the Mullahs.

Mitchell Powell February 2, 2011 at 11:44 pm

Now, now, Tom. There’s nothing hypocritical about judging a current dictator for his actions while neglecting to be angry about crimes not yet committed by unknown future persons who may or may not come to power.It’s silly of you to call the protesters “a bunch of radicals.” The young secular men who are fed up with the terrorism, and the famed photograph of a stout middle-aged woman with her face uncovered planting a kiss on the right cheek of a soldier in public are not the faces of an Islamo-fascist rebellion.Why would El Baradei reject the endorsement of the Muslim Brotherhood? They officially stand for non-violence, and even if there is the possibility that some of their members do not, they are poised to capture no more than 25% to 30% of the vote in Egypt.Be careful, Tom, or your fear of imagined future events may drive you right into the arms of the brutal dictatorial status quo.

tom February 4, 2011 at 3:06 pm

Mitchell
The radicals I was referring to were the Muslim Brotherhood. Their motto from their website from the founder of the group Hassan al-Banna : God is our purpose, the prophet our leader, the Quran our constitution,, jihad our way and dying for God our objective. Another quote from same-”it is the nature of Islam to dominate, not be dominated, to impose its law on all nations, and to extend its power to the entire planet”. Not hearing anything about market reforms or improving individual liberties. When I hear words like impose, dominate and jihad as the way I don’t think peaceful, do you? Baradei and his buds aren’t talking about facilitating free and open markets. Instead they are advocating for religious dictatorship which I am sure will be used to get even with the people they have a grievance against. Absent US aid in Egypt and not involving itself in the politics of the region, if an Iranian style government was in place there for the past twenty years, do you really think peace would prevail over violence against non-Muslims?
The presence of a dictatorial strongman in the region is a reminder that the world has no interest in calling Islam to task on its human rights failings so that it could peacefully assimilate into the world political scene. Instead it chooses dump the responsibility of repressing the violence with violence on a single entity(Mubarek) and then complain about the means in which the tenuous detente is achieved. Easy to blame one man than the governments of the world that continue to stand by and pretend that militant Islam is a microcosm of the religion instead of the substantial political power that it really is.

newson February 3, 2011 at 12:07 am

tom’s conflation of israel and the us is telling.

tom February 3, 2011 at 3:30 pm

Mitchell,
Fair enough. However, the exodus of people who are non-Muslim from the mideast is fairly substantial due to the incompatibility of other religions with Islam. And given the protesters demands for more Sharia compliant governance in Jordan, Yemen and yes Egypt, it appears to me the proverbial writing is on the wall. As for the Muslim Brotherhood’s “official” stance on non-violence, I would say that is more for the sake of political expedience than anything else. I would beg you do a bit more research on their influence in the region. Under Islam I believe the term is “Takyia”. Saying what the public wants to hear until you get what you really want. I would prefer to see the expansion of Individual rights, liberty and the free market develop in the region. Having spent some time in that part of the world, talking and working with Shia, Sunnis and Kurds, I just don’t see how it can happen. I don’t support any dictator in a position of power but that is exactly what you will end up if a theocracy evolves. So until the mystical moderate Islamic leader appears and calls for a ban on all the human rights violations that do occur under Sharia influenced governance, I believe that sadly the Egyptians will be stuck with the status quo.

newson February 3, 2011 at 7:16 pm

to tom:
i agree with your second comment, above. i think it’s a mistake to believe that middle-eastern cultures will transform to become like jeffersonian america, based on individualistic values.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/middleeast/la-fg-tunisia-police-20110202,0,3924086.story

on the other hand, the us does meddle in their affairs. better they keep their tyranny on their soil. us keeping out of their hair would be a step in that direction.

Sione February 4, 2011 at 1:12 pm

There is nothing so attractive to socialist adventurers as other people’s business (except, of course, other people’s money).

Egypt is best left for the Egyptians to deal with I reckon. Interference makes things worse than they would otherwise become.

Sione

Robert February 4, 2011 at 11:38 pm

” to alter and abolish the form of government under which they are forced to live. . .”

“. . . and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.”

Neither Thomas Jefferson nor the protesters in Freedom Square are so naive as to think you can “alter or abolish” a tyranny and leave nothing in its place.

Believe All Things February 5, 2011 at 7:40 pm

Above Juliusz stated:

This article seems to be a bit naive in respect of “people’s will”. I knew few Arabs and ALL of them had heads full of socialist ideas.

Some mistakenly believe that the Muslim Brotherhood are behind recent events in Egypt. However, upon closer examination a brief History of the Muslim Brotherhood reveals that there are other forces at play.

Nelson Tibbitt February 6, 2011 at 2:54 pm

Great commentary. There is provocation in your final paragraph, intended or not. Thank you, sir.

Comments on this entry are closed.

Previous post:

Next post: