What has stood out in a lot of American commentary over the last week is an embarrassing giddiness about the upheaval in Egypt. It’s partly the usual reckless American enthusiasm for anything that can be described as “people power,” but there is an eagerness to get on the “right side of history” that resembles nothing so much as a rush to mouth the most preciously politically correct pieties. There are not “right” and “wrong” sides of history. Indeed, the implied notion of historical inevitability in that phrase ignores everything about history that matters–its contingency, its uncertainty, and the importance of human agency.
There have also been the Iraq war supporters desperately trying to claim credit on behalf of Bush administration policies. Fortunately for them, what is happening in Egypt has nothing to do with those policies, because the outcome may prove to be as disastrous for all involved as the invasion of Iraq was. What is telling is that not even the Bush administration was foolish enough to continue pushing democracy promotion in Egypt. We have repeatedly heard the laughable counterfactuals that if only Obama had embraced the “freedom agenda” and publicly hectored Mubarak the Egyptian people would not now be rising up, as if fewer restrictions on secular and liberal candidates and free elections were going to lower the price of bread, slash inflation, magically produce more jobs, or reduce mass poverty. This idea would almost be comical if it weren’t shaping policy debate and pressuring the government to make foolish decisions.
Again, this has really stood out to me, as well, and I think maybe I am just really, really leery after having had too much of the neocon kool-aid at the beginning of the last decade and got so many things so very wrong, but this is the third or fourth time I’ve watched what seems like everyone around me go bonkers screaming “freedom” without thinking much about what was going on. It happened during the last election, when John McCain and the snowbilly got all giddy over Georgia, but fortunately the partisan nature of elections kept most liberals somewhat sane. Then we had the Iranian nonsense, where everyone went nuts and changed their blog colors green, impervious to the notion that lots of people were going to die when the uprising was crushed. Then this.
I think there are some personality traits at play, too. People, in general, like to be a part of big things, and with the media hype, everyone gets to play along. Additionally, everyone likes an underdog. On top of that, bloggers and twitter afficionados like new content, and this is new and sexy. I think a lot of liberals associate with young students and educated professionals taking the streets. Finally, I think the fact that many Americans think “democracy” and associate it with the United States, and if only the protestors win, they will be holding elections and it will be like America with Muslim people. People fail to recognize that a free country with an open democracy means they are free to elect leaders who hate the United States (see Hamas, also too), which, in many cases, is a quite rational hatred for the things we do. Whether it be our constant meddling in foreign affairs, our continuous bombing and drone campaigns and near-permanent war, etc. And that doesn’t even get into the joy that corporate America has bestowed on all the people around the world who were “fortunate” enough to be born poor and living on top of oil, diamonds, or something else we want. The upside is that the last decade has demonstrated that we are also willing to do quite awful and illegal things to American citizens, too, so we are now at least equal opportunity offenders.
Put all that together, add in the notion that any time anything happens anywhere there is this odd expectation that the President “do something,” and you get the reactions we’ve seen the past two weeks.
Cry Freedom and Let Loose the Blogs of WarPost + Comments (143)