Better the Devil You Know?
Article: http://www.economist.com/news/leaders/21580462-muhammad-morsi-was-incompetent-his-ouster-should-be-cause-regret-not-celebration-egypts
It wasn't until the recent ousting (the gerund form of oust seems more in line with what I understand of current standards of English) of former president Morsi that I have become aware of the situation in Egypt. While I hold but the utmost respect for our Egyptian brothers and sisters, I cannot help but share the sentiments of The Economist: ousting by force a democratically elected president seems a recipe for disaster. That the Egyptian military general, General Abdulfattah al-Sisi, was not only able to suspend the Egyptian constitution but also instate the Chief Justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court, Adly Mansour, as interim president strikes me as alarming.
Now, as I understand it, supporters of this ousting have eschewed calling the Egyptian military's actions a coup (what with all the charged negative baggage the term holds). Certainly this avoidance is wise, but is it actually effective? Does the popularity of the action diminish the fact that the designation of coup is actually quite apropos? Is murder any less murder by virtue of its popularity? Well...perhaps there is some wiggle room here. For instance, some may not equate capital punishment to murder. Further, self-defense is not murder. But in each case, I fail to see popularity as the deciding factor to whether an action is murder or not.
Let us backup a bit. Let us even go so far as to entertain the hypothetical that 100% of Egypt's citizens wanted President Morsi deposed. Would such a circumstance justify the actions that have actually taken place? Though I hesitate, I would still say no--such actions would still not be justified. Allow me to quickly qualify: I am American and am only knowledgeable (albeit, but somewhat) of American civics. I have no knowledge of the Egyptian constitution. That being said, if Egypt's constitution and government framework are anything like the United States', then I would remind you that our constitution actually defends us against pure democracy--also known in a more pejorative sense as ochlocracy or mob rule (you might imagine the state of affairs in occupied Gotham City as portrayed in The Dark Knight Rises).
While it would have been better to follow the processes set forth by the Egyptian constitution in redressing the grievances of the citizenry, at this point, discussing counterfactuals is but academic. I can only hope for the best for Egypt.
It wasn't until the recent ousting (the gerund form of oust seems more in line with what I understand of current standards of English) of former president Morsi that I have become aware of the situation in Egypt. While I hold but the utmost respect for our Egyptian brothers and sisters, I cannot help but share the sentiments of The Economist: ousting by force a democratically elected president seems a recipe for disaster. That the Egyptian military general, General Abdulfattah al-Sisi, was not only able to suspend the Egyptian constitution but also instate the Chief Justice of the Supreme Constitutional Court, Adly Mansour, as interim president strikes me as alarming.
Now, as I understand it, supporters of this ousting have eschewed calling the Egyptian military's actions a coup (what with all the charged negative baggage the term holds). Certainly this avoidance is wise, but is it actually effective? Does the popularity of the action diminish the fact that the designation of coup is actually quite apropos? Is murder any less murder by virtue of its popularity? Well...perhaps there is some wiggle room here. For instance, some may not equate capital punishment to murder. Further, self-defense is not murder. But in each case, I fail to see popularity as the deciding factor to whether an action is murder or not.
Let us backup a bit. Let us even go so far as to entertain the hypothetical that 100% of Egypt's citizens wanted President Morsi deposed. Would such a circumstance justify the actions that have actually taken place? Though I hesitate, I would still say no--such actions would still not be justified. Allow me to quickly qualify: I am American and am only knowledgeable (albeit, but somewhat) of American civics. I have no knowledge of the Egyptian constitution. That being said, if Egypt's constitution and government framework are anything like the United States', then I would remind you that our constitution actually defends us against pure democracy--also known in a more pejorative sense as ochlocracy or mob rule (you might imagine the state of affairs in occupied Gotham City as portrayed in The Dark Knight Rises).
While it would have been better to follow the processes set forth by the Egyptian constitution in redressing the grievances of the citizenry, at this point, discussing counterfactuals is but academic. I can only hope for the best for Egypt.
Test
ReplyDelete