with the end or decline of the arab spring ‘revolutions’ tide, and the outcome of the revolution of january 25 in egypt, the intellectuals in our region are perplexed and wonder. would they have supported democracy and go with it, whatever the results? what if groups that do not believe in democracy at all such as the brotherhood or the salafists came to power through the ballot boxes?
what would be the position of the supporters of democracy if they felt that this would be their last era of free elections, but were forced to comply with the will of the majority? is security and livelihood more important or human freedom and dignity? what about the future generations?
why do some people prefer, truthfully and without purpose, dictatorial regimes and find them much better than theocratic or religious rule, such as the muslim brotherhood and others? why do some find salvation in the rule of the military, the intelligence, who are most prepared to remain in power longer compared to other forms of rule? is it because the former provides security and accomplishes projects in a faster way or because the rule of the military is for the interest of some and provides cover for their corruption?
why is it sometimes difficult or impossible to get rid of military rule and even religious rule as is the case in many countries, including iran and algeria? is it because the opposition to such regimes is considered to be an opposition to the supreme interest of the state or somewhat against god represented by religious rule?
why arab and muslim states accept the existence or participation of religious parties in political life or democratic if any, while they are certain that these parties do not recognize anything originally called a homeland and words such as freedom, dignity and democracy that do not exist in the vocabulary of their dictionaries?
why is a third party calling for the return of colonialism or for a third party to govern us under the pretext our situation was better during their existence than our current fight and fragmentation, and we did not mature enough to rule ourselves? why are the cases of negligence, carelessness and recklessness that have afflicted many arab and muslim countries almost acceptable and agreed upon as voices demanding change after seeing the results of the destruction on several countries due to the change of face?
why do some supporters of dictatorships justify that it is the only way to restore the prestige of the state, eliminate sabotage, fight terrorism, and cast away religious parties from power while building the economy, reforming the infrastructure, creating new sources of income, creating jobs, all of which cannot be achieved through democratic means?
why do opponents of dictatorships continue to say “not by bread alone” and how nice to achieve high rates of development, but for whom? is it not for the people? what if these people have become those who have no dignity and respect for themselves and their homeland, after all the years of humiliation, and breach of privacy, during the period of state building which the human beings have missed everything related to morality and loyalty to the homeland?
a friend says that democracy is a means, not an end. china has surpassed the growth rates of all democracies because it is the communist party which believes in the discipline that we desperately need, and the rule of the military or dictatorship is the path to discipline, otherwise, the state will lose all its wealth, natural and human and venezuela is a perfect example.
supporters of individual rule say democracy is the best way to govern, but people must reach a stage where they are ready to deserve freedom, not before that. others argue that it is difficult to draw a policy in which the people are ready to accept freedom and democracy because it is a cumulative process, people learn from their mistakes.
in all cases, religion and politics should always be separated, and all be equal in rights and duties, respect the rights of minorities, and then comes discipline, the seriousness of work, production and development, respect for law and its application on all, and only afterwards people deserve prosperity, freedom, democracy and circulation of power and freedom of opinion. until that day comes, we will continue to be a tribal, sectarian, family and nepotism state. the debate continues.