Last Reflection :(

Paul Ropp           

                Over the course of the year we have learned a lot about civil society, social uprisings, the ability for people to challenge authority, and how that all relates to the MENA region; and Serbia. What I really have gotten out of this class is the ability to look at any MENA event in a different context, through a different lens. I can now see how MENA region civil society is just a modified version of Western civil society nothing more and nothing less. I also think even knowing what civil society is in this sort of depth gives you an edge in a lot of the other classes you will have as an SIS major, I mean in world politics they were talking about civil society and it did not compare even slightly to the readings or the material we covered in class. Overall I think that the way we talked about civil society in and around the MENA region in all different types of contexts is unequivocally helpful and will continue to be so for sometime. Now I know I have rambled a little bit about the class but I want to leave you all with one last of my blurps.   

                Last night a report was launched by MSNBC along with many other news sources that Syria is loading the chemical agent Niacin gas into bombs to be dropped on rebel strong holds. AS far as this goes it is either a last ditch effort bluffs by Assad, a move to test the international community, or perhaps just pure insanity. The report said the military is now just waiting for Assads word to commence the final preparations and dropping these bombs. Forgoing the morbid parts of this discussion I can’t help but think how this would be happening if the Syrian people took their time in building up a unified non-violent civil society movement rather than jumping into a forgone revolution. Anyway I hope that this does not come to pass but if it does it will surley be the final nail in Assad’s coffin.

                Thank you guys! 

structured 6

Structured response 6

            During the class we have talked about both the successful revolutions and usage of civil society but we have also talked about the failings of civil society, however, I believe Egypt is on the way to a fully unified civil society and a complete democracy if they continue on their path with a few minor changes.

            The Egyptian civil society movement was successful in ousting Mubarak through non-violent protests and civil disobedience but now that a Morsi has come to power will the revolution survive. Morsi recently added more power to the presidency which allows him to circumvent much of the balances surrounded the office of Egyptian presidency, however he has not done this without repercussions. What I think is important to remember before we completely dismiss the revolution as a failure that took one tyrant for another it is important to look at the circumstances surrounding Morsi’s power grab. The Egyptian civil societies had just won a hard felt battle and began to settle down; it took a lot to mobilize the amount of people the first time and now that it has become evident Morsi will try to seize absolute power it will take some time for all the people to come together again. Also Morsi has not yet gained the power and authority that Mubarak had so the people have not yet felt the problem of Morsi’s rule; I mean “hey at least he isn’t killing us”. Another interesting point that may prove to be a fault for the opposition to Morsi’s power is the military.

            When the Egyptian military did nothing to support Mubarak they choose a side the protestors side however, since the Muslim brother hood is such a popular political party will the military choose the same side again? It seems that the military, like last time, could play the decisive role in what happens, if the military decides to back Morsi there will be either a revolution on a violent scale or perhaps the people will continue non-violent protests; either way bringing Morsi out of power is no easy task.

            Now on to the question what should civil society do? As far as removing Morsi, the Egyptian civil society should keep on doing what it is doing; non-violent protests, propaganda, shamming, organizational movements, and the spreading of civil society organizations with a few exceptions. As the president had the majority of support the Egyptian civil society should focus on mobilizing the sectors of society who supported Morse in the election explaining why he needs to be removed immediately before more power grabs can take place. This is also something the Egyptian society should try and do, create rapid mobilization efforts and advocacy groups to demonstrate, non-violently, and to get Morsi removed from power. Although there are some flaws with Egyptian civil society, as there are will all civil societies they have been doing a very good job at mobilizing and unifying society and should continue to that effect but with more ferocity and a new spirit.  

Structured 7

Paul Ropp

                                         Structural Response week 7

            In the United States we have a republic, and not just any old republic; The Grande Olde Republic; an ode to all that is good and righteous in the world, standing above all else, especially those shady autocratic regimes of the MENA region; Simply put the one democracy to rule them all. But what, if anything, separates the US political system from that of any other country, are we really so perfect, and has it always been that way?

            Well, in reality the US like any other state and has had its fair share of atrocities, from slavery, Indian Removal Acts, internment camps, and general electoral hogwash due to massive political corruption. So in reality the MENA region is not as far behind the westernized world as we would think. Although, there are some benefits to the modern state of US politics it is not without failings; Super-Pacs running amuck, closed door deals, and a sense of autonomy are all things that US citizens contend with from time to time, depending on who is in charge and where, of course. However, as you can see the US and the MENA region are not so different. In the US there is a harsh division between conservatives and liberals one that mirrors the religious and the secularists in the MENA region. Both camps hold devote beliefs that cannot be compromised by discourse, although the exact beliefs may be different, you won’t see a conservative and a liberal compromise on abortion, any more than MENA region religious groups and secularist groups agreeing on comprehensive education reform. Moreover, in the US, specifically conservative states there is an outrage to the promulgation of creationism as a scientific theory, as well as the altering of text books to teach the children comparable to their religious upbringing. The idea that history should, or even can be altered to fit the agenda of a fundamentalist group is outrageous to the Liberal, and even the moderate spectrum of society. The problem of cleaning up history is also underway by fundamentalist Muslims who destroy pre-Islamic cave drawings, as they depict “blasphemous” images. In reality the political spectrum of the US and MENA region countries only differs by the brand of extremism, Muslim instead of Christian. Although, there is one difference between the US and MENA regions that shouldn’t be overlooked due to its massive importance which is a governments need for legitimacy.

            In the MENA region the different political climate and deep sectarian divisions allow the government to maintain a sense of autonomy to play one side against the other and to steer public rhetoric in such fashion. In the US, both citizens and countries around the world watch the US government with a critical eye. Although there are divisions in US society there are at some point superficial, when another government, or the US government threaten the “US” way of life, that comfort and rights US citizens enjoy there would be a unified uproar, but in that sense the US political spectrum differs dramatically from the MENA region. When one delves into US history you can see similarities to what is happening in the MENA region now.

            As Cavatorta points out there is a general theory map that countries follow when changing from a regime to a democracy. First the opening, a point where the regime will become a little more liberalized due to any one of innumerable factors. Secondly “the breakthrough” this is the point where the old regime collapses. Thirdly is “consolidation” of the new government. Although this theory is imperfect it gives a general road map to compare the US and the MENA region through historical analysis and civil society movements in the US. In the United States the importation of slaves was abolished in 1808, paving the way to the, highly criticized Emancipation proclamation, and to the civil rights movements of the late 20^th century. In the US African Americans participated in both violent and non-violent protests against the US government’s repression of their rights as human beings. Now what is truly comparable is that the US gave way to the immense public pressure and granted African Americans their rights.

            Now what is important to realize here is that civil society activists in the US were unified and the government needed to maintain its legitimacy which it could easily have lost in such a tumultuous time. Civil society movements in the MENA region will fare well if and only if they can unify society over a bigger issue and not play into sectarian conflict, such as the Egyptian revolution. The one and only large obstacle in the way of MENA region civil society is the ability to from a single cohesive social unit, granted it won’t be easy due to those pesky European Picket-Sykes and Balfour agreements. Although circumstance has placed the MENA region in a particularly hard place for the emergence of a full blown and well-oiled civil society machined, it is not an impossible task and will just take motivated civil society actors, time, and a unification of MENA region societies. 

Final Reflection

When I look at the first reflection I wrote for this course I am amazed at how much my view of the region has evolved as we have progressed throughout the course. From a very orientalist perspective I moved more and more to a more neutral and "unbiased" view of the region and started seeing it through the eyes of its inhabitants. In that way, I was finally able to come to an understanding as to how civil society, networks and grassroots organizations operate in the MENA region which is a bit different than from other parts in the world due, in part, to culture, history and mindset. That, in fact, is probably true of all regions and that might be a remnant of the orientalist mindset appearing in my discourse.

However, as to the course itself, I was a bit disappointed that we were only able to link up with the activists in the region once as opposed to the 3-4 times we were supposed to have done so. Unfortunately technological difficulties and scheduling conflicts rendered this pretty much impossible. One thing I thoroughly enjoyed in the course was the breaking up of the class into several different country groups to be used as case studies. I found that that helped understand the problems in the MENA region as well as the people and civil society in the region on a more intimate level which helped achieve a greater understanding of the topic. I would have liked, however, a bit more interaction between the different country groups because at times it seemed that the country groups were exclusive and, apart from the class discussions, there was not much interaction between the groups. Another thing that I enjoyed a lot in this class were the very pertinent documentaries, especially the one on Otpor! which helped show that the rise of civil society in the MENA region is not exclusive to the said region and that the way it rises and operates in other countries (Otpor! rose up in Serbia) is not dissimilar. The class discussions were also very enjoyable as they were very interactive and really helped connect with the class material.

All in all, this was one my favorite classes of the semester and although it was at times a bit bumpy due to it being a brand new course it was still a great experience and something that I would do again if I was offered the chance.

Reflection #11

Magda Borgarelli

Looking back at the whole course, I can honestly say I have learned a lot, not only about civil societies and social movements, but also on broader concepts, such as internationalism.  My favorite part about the class was the documentaries we watched.  They allowed me to understand the abstract concept we learned more thoroughly, since they offered me a sort of case study for different countries.  However, I would have liked to have learned more about specific countries in the MENA region (aside from the ones we were divided into) in the classroom.  Meaning, we could have analyzed and discussed them in class to complement both the briefs and the documentaries, as so have a stronger frame of reference when conducting our own research.  Overall, I feel like I am leaving this class with a solid knowledge base in both social movements and civil societies, as well as their possible accomplishments and limitations, and definitely more informed on the MENA region in general.  Before taking this course, I wasn’t aware of the various problems that small countries such as that of Bahrain (the one I was doing research for) could face, and how strong civil society can be in those places.  Now I realize that even small countries like Bahrain can rebel against their governments, with civil society and social movements playing a key role.

Reflection #10

Magda Borgarelli

On Tuesday, I went to the event Social Justice in Harry Potter and the Arab Springs.  At first, I thought it would have been something silly, mainly geared to win the support of the Harry Potter fans here on campus.  However, the presentation turned out to be very interesting, especially in the light of what we have learned throughout this course.  The girl who came up with the idea found that many parallels could be drawn between the J.K. Rowling book and the Arab Springs, specifically on social issues and civil societies.  For example, she compared the state of servitude in which the house elves in the book live and that of women in Saudi Arabia.  She also talked a little about the role of social media in the book (Potterwatch, the gold coins to indicate meeting dates) somewhat paralleled those in the Arab Spring (Facebook and Twitter).   Needless to say, I felt very knowledgeable on the subject since that is what we have been talking about all semester.  In fact, I have realized that the issues of civil societies and social movements can be applied to almost all cases of social injustice (or justice) that are happening all around us.  Almost always, when a specific group is deprived of some basic rights, some form of civil society organization will be formed, be it something like the one in Serbia, or even Dumbledore’s Army.  It is only through them that we can promote peaceful change, and it is thanks to them that we are able to voice our discontent of authoritative regimes or simply Voldemort.

Reflection 10

                                                                                Reflection 10

                Although there has been a lot of attention focused on the Israel-Palestine conflict, as the dispute that has been going on there is a focal point for the region, I plan on discussing something a bit more under the radar and has put one of the 2011 Arab spring movements civil society to the test, specifically the test of true unification.  

                “Tshe new President of Egypt Mohamed Morsi took extensive new powers for himself Thursday, freeing his decisions from judicial review and ordering retrials for former top officials, including ex-president Hosni Mubarak” (Washington post, Birnbaum). While international intentions are focused elsewhere, mainly the conflict in Israel and Syria, Morsi has made a power grab the likes of which the former president was toppled for. Morsi’s declaration came one day after brokering a cease-fire between Israeli and Palestine. The Morsi regime, a name which I thought hitherto inappropriate, however, my mind has been changed. The new president of Egypt is creating a sort of autonomous body, such as the Egyptian military has done, and been doing since the days of Mubarak. What this can do is turn what was once a sort of autocratic version of checks and balances with Mubarak on top the people at the bottom and a military controlling the ladder; now that Morsi has dismissed the higher ranks of the military, he has unprecedented power. Now there is a supposed time constraint on how long the powers of Morsi will last, but when is the last time a despot told the people who had just rebelled for a democracy that they would not get it? Another interesting thing that Morsi’s new powers allow him is the extradition of judicial review; no longer must people go through trial and no longer can the laws Morsi creates will not be subject to court’s rulings, basically he can do whatever he wants, in the interest of Egypt of course, much like the old regime. Although it seems as though the revolution is losing its momentum and that the autocratic regime is back with no or little resistance that is far from the truth, as the Egyptian will not allow such usurpations of democracy to be allowed.

                Although the people remain united in there want for a democratic government Muslim-brotherhood supporters have been demonstrating their support for Morsi though rallies, while many other Egyptians are protesting the newly found powers of the president. Don’t get it wrong both Islamists and secularists have been protesting the detestable power grab by Morsi, but only time will tell if the people are willing to unite in their cause against the regime and if the regime is willing to work with the people. 

Sean OBrien Reflection 11/15/2012

I think that the press that Spy gate scandal is getting is absolutely ridiculous. There is so much going on in the world especially with the tensions rising in the Battle between Israel and Hamas. Israel is now officially bombing Hamas. This week they killed the one of the top Hamas leaders and a result Hamas got pissed and has been continuously firing rockets into and around Tel Aviv. I was on Cnn the other day and i could barely find any mention of what was occurring in that particular area. Meanwhile headline news is about the CIA scandal. I mean granted it is a big deal, you have the head of American intelligence agency who may or may have compromised secrets or parts of the US. He is on record as saying that did not happen, but for obvious reasons you dont want to compromise said material. I just cant comprehend the vast amount of coverage. Where I logged onto the BBC and it was the first story that was being presented. I think that the US media is just very polarized and different from the rest of the world.

Reflection 9

It's amazing that more than 60 years after the creation of the State of Israel and the start of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict we are still more or less at the same place. The Israelis are still defending their claim to the land and the Palestinians and neighboring Arab allies are still fighting that claim. After 60 years, you would think that diplomacy, grassroots efforts and civil society would have ensured some sort of major change. Apart from the Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat negotiations that has simply not been the case.
What we see now is simply extremism on both sides not unlike, in a way, the extremization of our political parties here in the US where essentially in order to cater more to the base of their support, the parties/countries become more and more radical and reduce severely their ability to compromise which hampers all peace process. In these most recent attacks and rise of the conflict it is much pretty much certain that Israel is in the right even if their answer might be disproportionate. The states of the world and civil society cannot afford to pick a side because of politics or religion. Instead they must ensure that fair and just peace for both sides is achieved so that prosperity and peaceful existence for both sides becomes a reality as opposed to a distant possibility.

Structure Response

Khondker uses the term 'cyber-civil society' in his work. I think this is one of the most significant notes on the arab spring where social media was a factor. In class we continually attribute protests and rallying and uprising to effective civil societies. Not only did social media serve as a means to spread information, but as an organizational tool. The grass-roots efforts of mobilizing people, giving structure and focus to an increasing amount of citizens is the difficult but necessary jobs of such organizations. But, in most cases, civil societies are limited by how many people they can reach. However, if the internet is accessible in a region the expanse of who can be told of such a movement or force is infinite.

Tunisia is a good example of this. When only 28,000 citizens had a Facebook in 2008, protests movements died out. Yet in 2011, with 2 million people on Facebook, the Tunisian protests were much more effective and lasting. I believe that this, if nothing else, is a convincing argument that the arab spring would not be what it was without social media. Whether they would have happened or not without it can't be said for sure, but I am confident that they would not have reached the extent they did without sites like twitter and Facebook.

Egypt is another good example as to why social media played such an important role. When Khaled Said was (ironically) dragged out of a cyber-cafe and beaten to death, the pictures of him afterwards was what inspired people to take a stance. 35,000 people were organized together on a Facebook page, making them more than just lucky protestors but intelligent and focused citizens united for a cause.

While I do believe it possible that uprisings may have happened regardless of social media, the internet expedited the process and almost certainly improved the organization of people and made the protests more effective.

Reflection

This is a continuation from my structured response; as it doesn't answer the actual questions asked I decided I'd post it as a reflection.

I just finished reading Mill's On Liberty for another class, and I think many of his ideas about liberty are relevant to these situations. Mill emphasizes the need for discussion and the need for debate between contending opinions. He believes that fostering discussion allows for the progress of society, to find the truer truths and ensure a successful democracy. The variety of ideas and opinions are necessary to have the most 'true' or effective ideas. Debate allows communication and for people to form understandings of one another and creates a community atmosphere. Such an atmosphere gives power to the people.  Mill explains how action on a community based level is not only effective but allows people to become a part of something greater for themselves, and less dependent on the government.

While Mill was righting at a time that the electrical telegraph was only just invented, his ideas can be related to how people connect through the internet today. Perhaps bigots aimlessly arguing about whatever bugs them about the news that day isn't entirely productive; however people posting about events in blogs and in Facebook is not only an improved method for spread of word through the expansion of freedom of the press, but allows people to peacefully talk about issues and perhaps more importantly, solutions. People can connect with more people, meaning a higher variety of ideas.

The internet itself is a tool for democracy. Sadly, not everyone has complete access to the online world as some governments restrict its usage. I don't think that will be a problem forever, as the UN has established access to the internet something like a right. Regardless of whether social media is actually used to plan a protest, allowing people to establish a network of diverse people and diverse ideas can only aid societies' progression towards democracy and liberty.

Thursday November 14, 2012 Sean OBrien

Social Media as it pertains to Twitter and Facebook will be an ever expanding source in revolutions to come. I think that it would of been a lot harder to organize the Egyptian people into the Flash mob that occurred in Tahir Square.  I think that when people saw on Facebook that their was a mass of people and there were Safety in numbers. Like the documentary that we watched, one the Egyptian women described that people would see pictures of huge crowds and know that everything was alright.
I think this is also important because social media is commercialized and is usually not controlled by the State. Now there are places like North Korea that social media and other media sources are more restricted which I would imagine it would be considerably harder to receive.
Returning back to the middle east I think that Syria is a very similar case to that of Egypt. I have looked online and I have seen video coming out of Syria. Granted everything you see and hear on the internet is not necessarily true. We know that there is obviously and armed conflict and that helps to get that info out. I think that before too there was this assumption that you needed a leader, a single person to unite them(Being the rebels or revolutionists) ie Castro in the Cuban revolution. So I think that there is this new norm out there regarding social media. I think that Social Media is that Leader, the thing that brings people together and leads them. Not necessarily a cause per say but more of unifying factor. I think that Social media is so embedded in our generation that it will be hard for it not to be important in the future. Especially in something that is so important as a nations future during a revolution.

Structured Response #7

Magda Borgarelli

When looking at revolutions such as the ones that occurred in Egypt and Iran, one can’t help but notice the great role that social media tools, such as Facebook and Twitter, have played in spreading ideas.  Because of them, people were able to better coordinate their efforts in order to be more effective.  They are also the reasons why the world began to pay more attention to these movements.  Therefore, without the social media, videos in which the Iranian police was beating the demonstrators would not have become news in other nations, which in turn would not have been felt compelled to send aid or support the cause as much as they would have done without seeing them.  It can be argued that things like Twitter and Facebook showed those who were involved in the revolutions that they were not alone, that they had support not only internationally, but also locally.  Therefore, following that line of thought, without the social media to back them up, protestors would have simply given up their cause in the belief that they did not have a chance against the system.  However, that did not happen.

In fact, social media was AN important factor in the revolutions, not THE only factor.  If, for example, we look at similar movements in a near past where Facebook and Twitter did not exist, we can still see regimes be toppled and social reform being carried on.  Serbia was able to become democratic because its people took to the streets, and at that time, no one had Facebook or Twitter, and there was little international coverage of the Otpor.  What can be argued, though, is maybe the speed at which it gained its goals.  Whereas the revolution in Egypt took about a year, the one in Serbia took about two.  However, both movements reached what they set to achieve, with or without Facebook and Twitter.  Revolutions are about the people and whether or not they are willing to make sacrifices for a certain cause.  Social media only plays a supporting part.