One cannot but note the "miraculous" nature of the events in Egypt: something has happened that few predicted, violating the experts' opinions, as if the uprising was not simply the result of social causes but the intervention of a mysterious agency that we can call, in a Platonic way, the eternal idea of freedom, justice and dignity.
The uprising was universal: it was immediately possible for all of us around the world to identify with it, to recognise what it was about, without any need for cultural analysis of the features of Egyptian society. In contrast to Iran's Khomeini revolution (where leftists had to smuggle their message into the predominantly Islamist frame), here the frame is clearly that of a universal secular call for freedom and justice, so that the Muslim Brotherhood had to adopt the language of secular demands.
The most sublime moment occurred when Muslims and Coptic Christians engaged in common prayer on Cairo's Tahrir Square, chanting "We are one!" – providing the best answer to the sectarian religious violence. Those neocons who criticise multiculturalism on behalf of the universal values of freedom and democracy are now confronting their moment of truth: you want universal freedom and democracy? This is what people demand in Egypt, so why are the neocons uneasy? Is it because the protesters in Egypt mention freedom and dignity in the same breath as social and economic justice?
From the start, the violence of the protesters has been purely symbolic, an act of radical and collective civil disobedience. They suspended the authority of the state – it was not just an inner liberation, but a social act of breaking chains of servitude. The physical violence was done by the hired Mubarak thugs entering Tahrir Square on horses and camels and beating people; the most protesters did was defend themselves.
Although combative, the message of the protesters has not been one of killing. The demand was for Mubarak to go, and thus open up the space for freedom in Egypt, a freedom from which no one is excluded – the protesters' call to the army, and even the hated police, was not "Death to you!", but "We are brothers! Join us!". This feature clearly distinguishes an emancipatory demonstration from a rightwing populist one: although the right's mobilisation proclaims the organic unity of the people, it is a unity sustained by a call to annihilate the designated enemy (Jews, traitors).
So where are we now? When an authoritarian regime approaches the final crisis, its dissolution tends to follow two steps. Before its actual collapse, a rupture takes place: all of a sudden people know that the game is over, they are simply no longer afraid. It is not only that the regime loses its legitimacy; its exercise of power itself is perceived as an impotent panic reaction. We all know the classic scene from cartoons: the cat reaches a precipice but goes on walking, ignoring the fact that there is no ground under its feet; it starts to fall only when it looks down and notices the abyss. When it loses its authority, the regime is like a cat above the precipice: in order to fall, it only has to be reminded to look down …
In Shah of Shahs, a classic account of the Khomeini revolution, Ryszard Kapuscinski located the precise moment of this rupture: at a Tehran crossroads, a single demonstrator refused to budge when a policeman shouted at him to move, and the embarrassed policeman withdrew; within hours, all Tehran knew about this incident, and although street fights went on for weeks, everyone somehow knew the game was over.
Is something similar going on in Egypt? For a couple of days at the beginning, it looked like Mubarak was already in the situation of the proverbial cat. Then we saw a well-planned operation to kidnap the revolution. The obscenity of this was breathtaking: the new vice-president, Omar Suleiman, a former secret police chief responsible for mass tortures, presented himself as the "human face" of the regime, the person to oversee the transition to democracy.
Egypt's struggle of endurance is not a conflict of visions, it is the conflict between a vision of freedom and a blind clinging to power that uses all means possible – terror, lack of food, simple tiredness, bribery with raised salaries – to squash the will to freedom.
When President Obama welcomed the uprising as a legitimate expression of opinion that needs to be acknowledged by the government, the confusion was total: the crowds in Cairo and Alexandria did not want their demands to be acknowledged by the government, they denied the very legitimacy of the government. They didn't want the Mubarak regime as a partner in a dialogue, they wanted Mubarak to go. They didn't simply want a new government that would listen to their opinion, they wanted to reshape the entire state. They don't have an opinion, they are the truth of the situation in Egypt. Mubarak understands this much better than Obama: there is no room for compromise here, as there was none when the Communist regimes were challenged in the late 1980s. Either the entire Mubarak power edifice falls down, or the uprising is co-opted and betrayed.
And what about the fear that, after the fall of Mubarak, the new government will be hostile towards Israel? If the new government is genuinely the expression of a people that proudly enjoys its freedom, then there is nothing to fear: antisemitism can only grow in conditions of despair and oppression. (A CNN report from an Egyptian province showed how the government is spreading rumours there that the organisers of the protests and foreign journalists were sent by the Jews to weaken Egypt – so much for Mubarak as a friend of the Jews.)
One of the cruellest ironies of the current situation is the west's concern that the transition should proceed in a "lawful" way – as if Egypt had the rule of law until now. Are we already forgetting that, for many long years, Egypt was in a permanent state of emergency? Mubarak suspended the rule of law, keeping the entire country in a state of political immobility, stifling genuine political life. It makes sense that so many people on the streets of Cairo claim that they now feel alive for the first time in their lives. Whatever happens next, what is crucial is that this sense of "feeling alive" is not buried by cynical realpolitik.
• Slavoj Žižek is co-editor of The Idea of Communism, published by Verso Books.
From cineuropa en
Comments in chronological order (Total 281 comments)
10 February 2011 8:37PM
Zizek,what would Lenin advise the protesters?
10 February 2011 8:37PM
And now you.
What do you advise? Or do you just do analysis?
10 February 2011 8:38PM
That's the difference between a 'Marxist' and a Communist.
10 February 2011 8:39PM
"A CNN report from an Egyptian province showed how the government is spreading rumours there that the organisers of the protests and foreign journalists were sent by the Jews to weaken Egypt – so much for Mubarak as a friend of the Jews.)"
Mubarak has never been a friend of Jews or Israel. He was a partner in a cold peace. That was his value - that there is no war.
What a western audience perhaps does not know is that pernicious anti-semitism was tolerated in state-sanctioned media and educational institutes. Ant-Semitism is pressure valve for peoples who are manipulated - whether by the government or the ruling NDP.
Jews will be used by both sides to undermine the other's legitimacy, as both sides believe that such an accusation is akin to the ultimate evil/betrayal/fill it in.
I hope that they can get their stuff together. I hope for Social Democracy.
At the moment it looks like we're having an army coup - perhaps followed by (free) elections.
10 February 2011 8:39PM
The way things are going right now, we may yet have one of our here in the UK. I am not sure yet who will be willing to set themself alight.
10 February 2011 8:40PM
And finally, what's the difference between David Cameron's 'Muscular liberalism' and yours?
10 February 2011 8:40PM
Let us hope that Mubarak steps down tonite! I cannot believe that all these people demonstrating against Mubarak are demonstrating for anything less than a democratic Egypt. Let us put cynicism aside and hold up the lantern of optimism for both Egypt and the whole of the Arab World. Democracy means peace - for East and West!
10 February 2011 8:41PM
Come on Eygpt. They said that it was impossible to bring down the Communist block as well. Toss out Murabak, and don't allow him the luxury of the good life in Saudi Arabia. Trial him, and then jail him.
10 February 2011 8:44PM
Its the same old circle in these Arab countries.
The simple story is-
People suppressed- Revolution- New government with new promises- people suppressed!
10 February 2011 8:45PM
I have been following the story since it begun.
The only thing I did not spot in this eagerness for democracy and freedom, is a capable opposition, to carry it through. A country of 80 plus million can easily descend into complete anarchy. Only the enemies of Egypt will benefit.
10 February 2011 8:46PM
This miracle can still go very sour and the American "inteligence" services and the Israeli government are working very, very hard to ensure the Mubarak political edifice stays intact.
Lets hope that the courage, intelligence and fortitude of the Egyptian insurgents get them through this incredibly difficult times
Insha'Alla
10 February 2011 8:47PM
Brilliant.
Brilliant.
10 February 2011 8:49PM
A fine example of the inarticulate excitement of a comfortable Marxist academic observing social turbulence in a foreign society: the sociologist's version of smelling napalm in the morning
10 February 2011 8:52PM
I will not count the chickens of the Egyptian Revolution until I see the eggs of the uprising hatch.
Mubarak is supposed to address the nation tonight, and rumors about his departure - or his delegating of powers to the army, or whatever are going running wild -as of this writing. And that makes me very suspicious. If Mubarak steps down tonight, I believe this will be due to a U.S. and Israeli pre-packaged plan to maintain his policies in force with different faces from his regime - but with the same goal of protecting U.S. and Israeli interests first! Mubarak's departure, therefore, will be just the ploy to blindside the revolution!
The Egyptian Revolution is now at the cross-point of the U.S. and Israeli barricades which feverishly strive to maintain the Mubarak regime under Suleiman. Hillary Clinton made it simple and clear yesterday when she said: "My priority is to protect the security and the interests of the United States!" (Chicago Tribune, Feb. 10, 2011) And both the U.S. and Israel want to continue with Mubarak's regime which protected the U.S. and Israeli interests for 30 years - rather than venture into the turbulent currents of the people's revolution.
Omar Suleiman who was called in Arab media outlets "The CIA man in Cairo," and who as Egypt Intelligence Chief had daily contacts with the Israeli Mossad in secure phone lines -according to other reports in the Arab press, is too discredited by the Egyptian masses to be trusted with any transition.
They want to start with “a clean slate,” whereas the U.S. and Israel want to re-shuffle the Mubarak regime. And the fact that Mubarak put him on the driver's seat of his government, and Suleiman boldly bragged that "Mubarak is not going anywhere," and then threatened to crush the revolution "with a declaration of martial law," has made quite clear to the Egyptians that he will try everything to preserve the status quo with just window dressing promises to the demonstrators.
Historians and media people may recall that the late Shah Reza Pahlevi tried the Mubarak's ploy in 1979 by appointing Shapour Bahtiar as prime minister and authorized him to make reforms. But the Iranians wanted nothing to do with the Shah's puppet prime minister - as Egyptians now want nothing to do with Mubarak's puppet -Omar Suleiman. And as Shapour Bahtiar threatened to crash the Iranian protesters by staging a show of force by the Shah's massive royal guard in downtown Tehran, so does Suleiman now with his threat to crush the Egyptian revolution with the Egyptian army. The Bahtiar ploy failed because lower rank Iranian officers revolted, and higher rank general were arrested and executed. That is a possible scenario in Egypt - if Mubarak's loyal army commanders turn the guns on the people. And if that happens, Mubarak and Suleiman may end up having the fate of Romania's last dictator Nicolae Ceausescu. Ceausescu, like Suleiman, counted on his "securitate" apparatus to protect him, but he found himself before a quick Romanian army court martial, and an instant execution by firing squad within minutes of its "guilty" verdict.
Suleiman may not be as omnipotent as he thinks - assuming he is not bluffing. And as it happened in 1952, I have no doubt that there are many young officers in the Egyptian army that may explode into an open rebellion against the regime once the streets of Cairo are filled with dead bodies. And if the shooting by he army against the people starts, those officers might do what Nasser did in 1952, or what the Iranian lower rank officers did in 1979.
Reports in the press have confirmed the the U.S. Defense Secretary Mr. Gates, and the Egyptian Defense Minister Marshal Tantawi talk almost daily on the phone. And that may give Obama the false security that he controls the Egyptian army, and he will have the final word on who will take over after Mubarak or after Suleiman. But that will be shortsighted. The Greek historian Herodotus argued that "invaders cannot control occupied lands against the will of their citizenry forever." That argument has "met" the test of history. Now, Obama's and Israel's plan, to use the more modern Machiavellian model of installing, training, and bribing another despot “to protect their interests” at the expense and the welfare of the population, is just a continuation of the one that has failed - after 30 years.
Can the U.S. and Israel rebuilt it from scrap? No, because the Egyptians are now in a higher level of awareness of the U.S. and Israeli efforts to build a new regime in Egypt with parts salvaged from the old Mubarak's junk yard! And they want a “new and shiny” vehicle to ride into the future, as well as the closing down of the Mubarak's junk yard for good! Nikos Retsos, retired professor
10 February 2011 8:53PM
Good article.
But you don't have to be "anti-Semitic" to refuse to cooperate with Israeli suppression of your brother Arabs.
If there is real democracy in Egypt, Zionism is in for a hard time. That is surely good news?
10 February 2011 8:53PM
We are all Red:
"This miracle can still go very sour and the American "inteligence" services and the Israeli government are working very, very hard to ensure the Mubarak political edifice stays intact."
Nonsense. Israel has no power on the ground and it's intelligence service has no ability to do anything - they didn't even see this coming. The Egyptian army is the powerhouse and they are no overt friend of Israel.
The Army is who you should focus on.
PS: Calling these brave demonstrators 'insurgents' is ridiculous. Egypt has always had foreign backing - whether Soviet or American - and it is the army that has determined the fate of the country.
10 February 2011 8:55PM
Egypt's President Mubarek need utter only four words to the crowds standing idle in Cairo
Get back to work.
There are horses and camels starving at Giza because tourists from the West are staying away in droves, while bewitching the Egyptian people with socialist democratic mirages wrecking the Egyptian economy. Adding up to one thing. Impoverishment.
Get on with your work.
Standing idle in Cairo is bringing economic ruin, which on the ground provides irksome poverty. While the grass grows under protestors feet in Cairo, for the sake of Western humbug, Egypt is ruined.
Get back to work.
Futile protest is taking food out of the mouths of Egyptians. Rulers are not a terror to the good, who need to get on with their work and feed their families.
Ye are idle. Get back to your work.
10 February 2011 8:55PM
@Cyberclasm
There is something not quite right with that question, but nevertheless I believe that this bit from the article indirectly provides a possible answer:
10 February 2011 8:59PM
@Exceptional:
"But you don't have to be "anti-Semitic" to refuse to cooperate with Israeli suppression of your brother Arabs."
This is a ridiculous statement. Jewish conspiracies are being invoked.
"If there is real democracy in Egypt, Zionism is in for a hard time. That is surely good news?"
Why? What will happen? Will Egypt launch a war in the name of democracy?
Israel has a peace treaty with Egypt. Will that be broken so that Egypt can stick its nose into other people's conflicts?
Please be aware that Egypt and most other Arab nations, inc. democratic Lebanon, have done very little for Palestinians.
10 February 2011 9:01PM
From the political point of view, it is expedient for a government to consist of all of the forces that operate in society. This is the most balanced state there can be.
It’s not an accident that to this day no one has found a better form of government than democracy, which gives everyone access to power, doing so with correlations that approximately correspond to the people’s views. This is undoubtedly closer to the spiritual form than anything else.
Therefore, despite the big mess that is happening, the current processes should be viewed positively. They are causing the truth to be discerned, and that is already progress and development.
10 February 2011 9:10PM
drewv
And yet how can you speak(Zizek in this case) about acting courageously in line with your liberal principles and not challenge multiculturalism. How can Zizeck play the liberalism card when it comes to Egypt and say shtum about what Cameron actually was talking about.
Now that's deceit and rhetorical trickery!
10 February 2011 9:12PM
Moreover what real difference is there between a bourgeoise academic who is a Marxist and one who isn't?
10 February 2011 9:13PM
That's the problem with these intellectuals. They are mere court jesters.
10 February 2011 9:16PM
I think the obvious options of the political developments in Egypt have already been stated, repeatedly, at length and in detail. But I suppose restating the obvious can prompt an interesting surfeit of a wide range of people's opinions and judgments.
1. There is nothing miraculous about the events in Egypt. What is most surprising is that these events haven't happened sooner. No mysteries, no miracles, no sudden switch from ice cold to the heat of a furnace. Inflection point it might be, but there's no hidden meaning, Marxist spirituality (shudder, I'm sure Karl would be appalled and suitably barbed in his comments) or mezzanine skulduggery, in the current grassroots political and social situation of Egypt.
2. As is blatantly clear, the uprising is widespread. But, it hasn't spread around the world, why would it? So the revolt in Egypt isn't actually universal, and no amount of chicanery, charlatanry or hyperbole, will make it so.
3. Also, one of the things that is actually lacking in the press, is a decent analysis of the situation on the ground, the sort of analysis that doesn't resort to sentimentalism, polemic and self-aggrandisement, at the expense of journalistic and intellectual rigour.
4. All physical manifestations of violence are both symbolic and tangible. It does seem like an overdose of wishful thinking to expect a true revolution in Egypt, or even to represent this as the wish of those who want to see the regime end. It's
At the end of the day, the people of Egypt may be a little or a lot more freer than they are now, this will be up to them to decide, but the chances that this will somehow emulate a western liberal-Christian/Judaic-democratic form of liberation, are slim, and for reasons that should be quite obvious – not everyone around the world buys into that hypocrisy.
10 February 2011 9:17PM
So he's not stepping down. Clearly resisting Zionist pressure.
Mubarak is a fool.
10 February 2011 9:19PM
So,has the American puppet has cut his strings, like Saddam before him? Or is he still jerking to their commands?
Either way - his end is near.
The only question now is - will there be massive bloodshed or not?
10 February 2011 9:21PM
Jewish conspiracies? Pray tell us more.....
10 February 2011 9:24PM
Shit... Mubarak praises the "martyrs" and then refused to step down thus probably condemning more protestors to martyrdom tonight. If you're a patriot: Just. Fucking. Leave.
10 February 2011 9:25PM
@McLefty
Dunno. I only said they'll to refuse to cooperate with Israeli suppression of their brother Arabs. Lebanon is still officially at war with Israel, btw.
And the only other democracy around, Gaza, ain't too keen on them.
10 February 2011 9:26PM
@Exceptional:
"Jewish conspiracies? Pray tell us more....."
Clearly you didn't read the article.
But for your benefit: The Mubarak regime is painting the unrest as a Jewish conspiracy. This news has been filtering through since the beginning and is re-stated in the article above.
Mubarak is invoking this conspiracy in an attempt to appeal to (in his opinion) the baser instincts he has fed to his population through the media.
10 February 2011 9:27PM
This is not a working class revolution, or even a revolution of any kind. It is, if anything, an attempt at regime change and in bringing about a society more in accord with what more people want. This is quite possibly a new phase in the progress of the evolution of a country, and all kudos to the Egyptians. But the cloying, clunking and calamitous interpretation, as in this eclectic, Walter Mittyish and surreal viewpoint from the west, is hopefully nothing like the reality on the ground.
Put another way, I think I would tend to agree with @Leopold1904.
10 February 2011 9:28PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
10 February 2011 9:28PM
Excellent article and particularly poignant in light of Mubarak's refusal to step down.
@Leopold1904:
With the greatest respect, Leopold, actually your response has all the hallmarks of the 'comfortable' western observer, sneering cynically from the sidelines.
This is a moment of great importance and of great hope at the same time. The fact that this has completely fucked western states foreign policy and the home policies of their despotic stooges should highlight the need to emphasise the courage and greatness of the Egyptian revolution, which (bearing in mind the current food prices!) will surely spread.
10 February 2011 9:29PM
"Zizek,what would Lenin advise the protesters?" - cyberclasm
*
Probably nothing. Lenin's been dead for over eighty years. Also, he didn't speak Arabic.
10 February 2011 9:32PM
Why would the Zionists (do people really mean Zionists, or do they mean Israeli nationalists and expansionists?) want to see the end of Mubarak? Indeed, given the fact that Mubarak, for as bad as his regime was, provided a certain degree of stability in the relationship between Israel and Egypt, and by extension, provided Israel with a reduced risk footprint in the middle-east, why would they want to see the fall of Mubarak? Isn't that what the Obama/Clinton thing was all about ... "rock the boat, as you wish, but do so in a way that minimises risk to regional issues"
10 February 2011 9:32PM
@McLefty
Mubarak also invoked Iranians plotting against him. So it is wider than just a Jewish plot!
Reality: nobody buys his bunk anymore; and nobody will continue his pathetic pro-Israeli foreign policy.
Mubarak is but one of a string of US puppet dictatorships who talk anti-Zionism while actually aiding and abetting it. Think Saudi Arabia.
Most folk can see that. You?
10 February 2011 9:36PM
@olching
I think you make the mistake of assuming that just because the Pentagon and the White House (and by default, the "allies") thought that maintaining these regimes was important to regional and world stability, that it's actually true that they are really and truly significant factors for western states. Personally, I think far too much US foreign policy is based on paranoia, and even if Egypt went Marxist overnight (and that looks highly unlikely), the impact on the long-term big-picture, in terms of regional and world stability, would be negligible.
10 February 2011 9:37PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
10 February 2011 9:37PM
I don't believe that Zizek meant "miraculous" in the sense that it's all so good and beautiful that it makes angels weep (so to speak). He means "miracle" as in erupting out of nowhere and against expectations.
What the media loves is sensation, tout court. If it had been a sensational outburst of fascist violence, they would have loved it just as much (with the all-important condition that the cameras can keep rolling the whole time, of course).
10 February 2011 9:37PM
Like asking do people really mean a spade, or do they mean an implement for digging!
10 February 2011 9:41PM
"The way things are going right now, we may yet have one of our here in the UK. I am not sure yet who will be willing to set themself alight.
"
There are also some who would like to move against Cameron and coalition.
..
But these people are forgetting one thing. President Mubarak was elected in a dishonest way and he suspended rule of law, implementing emergency.
The present British Government was elected in a democratic way and people voted for it and people cannot just bring in mob to remove cameron.
10 February 2011 9:45PM
I wouldn't get your hopes up too high regarding Mubarak's speech tonight. Remember, this is Egypt:
Thursday:
Mubarak: I will step down next Tuesday.
The Crowd: Excellent! We have won! We'll come back next Tuesday.
Next Tuesday:
Mubarak: Oh, did I say Tuesday? I meant Thursday. Sorry.
The Crowd: Mahlaysh. We've still won! We'll come back Thursday.
Next Thursday:
(sign outside presidential palace): Sorry, but my cousin in Alexandria is very ill and I had to go visit him. Will be back to step down next Wednesday, Inshallah.
The Crowd scribbles on sign: Sorry to hear about your cousin. We'll come back next Wednesday.
Next Wednesday.
Mubarak (peering outside): Where's the crowd?
Army: They're coming tomorrow. Didn't you tell them you'd be back Thursday?
Mubarak: No, I said Wednesday. I'm sure of it.
Army: Mahlaysh. They'll be here tomorrow, Inshallah.
Thursday:
No Mubarak. No Crowd. Everyone forgot.
10 February 2011 9:45PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
10 February 2011 9:46PM
One thing that keeps being repeated in the news is that half the Egyptian people live on 2 dollars a day.
There are a few conclusions we can draw...
These people are too numerous and too poor that we can expect their situation to change in their lifetimes
The part of the population that is revolting, and can hope for change, will always be living in proximity with these poor people
It is not going to turn at well - at least in the short term
10 February 2011 9:49PM
I'm afraid the second option is looking more likely. Not so much 1989 as 1848.
10 February 2011 9:52PM
Hosni Mubarak is a selfish man who wants to hang on to power at any cost even it would economically ruin Egypt. He cares dam for the Egyptian people and for the world opinion as long he hold on to power with his teeth.
He is resisting every call to go because he is also doing it for other corrupt rulers if the Middle East. If he leaves, the rest of Arab corrupt and west's toe-sucking poodles will be standing in a queue to go.
10 February 2011 9:56PM
This comment was removed by a moderator because it didn't abide by our community standards. Replies may also be deleted. For more detail see our FAQs.
10 February 2011 9:58PM
"Torture with a human face". Hilarious!
It's incredible how long it has taken for someone to finally point that out. People called Rumsfeld on it when he jabbered about "the things we know we know and the things we know we don't know etc.", but Obama and Hillary are just as full with this kind of dissonance, they just don't seem to get called on it as much.
10 February 2011 9:58PM
It is 1848 again. Failed democratic revoltions that nonetheless heralded a new era.
It is a disparate protest that lacks leadership. Where is the Kemal Ataturk, Fidel Castro, or Lech Welesa?
Mubarek's hopeless if he cannot hang on in the face of what adds up to little more than a crowd of people taking time off work. Not all revolutions succeed.
10 February 2011 10:00PM
But what would a new Egypt look like?
The current regime is in trouble because the economy is fucked and getting worse.
The advantage of democracy is that it can persuade people that they have power, so they have to be responsible for the results.
With rising food prices and a demographic bomb exploding, there is no way out.
This a good moment for employable Egyptians to move abroad