But if you look at the history of the movement that eventually grew into Kifaya, it basically comes from the far-left (revolutionary socialists, Egyptian Communist Party and the more outspoken members of the traditional left), lefty Islamism, labor associations, and most importantly (I would argue) the movement that grew out of the solidarity groups that campaigned for Palestinians in 2001-2003 and Iraq in 2003. AGEG (the Anti-Globalization Egyptian Group) is one of these movements, but one that has little real clout among the larger left (although arguably it is bringing the most novel ideas and is slowly changing the ideological outlook of the paleo-left and young activists in particular.) The single-issue popular committees (lagan shaabia, singular lagna shaabia) were also very important in this regard.

I’m not sure what Kifaya is comparable to, really… it’s an interesting idea. The thing with Kifaya is that at times it’s a bit difficult to see what it’s about apart from being against Mubarak. Kifaya has not come out against globalization as far as I know, so it’s a bit tough to say that it is comparable to the global anti-globalization movement. But it could still evolve into something like that, especially in a post-Mubarak era.

And Prak, yes I do think she’s thinking about Kifaya and not the other demos. Very strange.

As far as I’ve understood AGEG, the popular committees etc. (and a lot of other groups and people I am not familiar with) more or less crescended into Kefaya (please correct me if I am wrong). This would follow a patter that emerged from the mid-80s to Seattle 99 (by way of esp. Birmingham in 1998) when all these diverse groups, individuals, NGOs etc. became the anti-capitalist movement (of course this is historical simplification).

I guess my point is that it is unsatisfactory to compare it to European or American views. Why not compare them to Venezuelans or Bolivians, or Indians and South Africans?

Absolutely true. In fact the biggest demonstrations of the past few years have been in cities like Mansoura, Alexandria, Zagazig and others. And they have tended to be run by Islamists, especially Islamist student movements at provincial universities, rather than secularists. This tends to go under-covered in foreign coverage of Egypt, because journalists are lazy and rarely stray outside of Cairo. But frankly it’s also under-covered in Arabic, probably for the same reasons.

I will not agree with you on Kifaya having more in common with Americans (or at least the “red” America that the current administration represents). Kifaya’s position in the ideological spectrum is one that is similar to many Europeans’ point of view, but this is a very minority opinion in America. Americans these days are rather ambivalent aboutthe secular state (see school prayers, “intelligent design,” the 10-commandments-in-courts-debate). And I would argue that Islamists are as dedicated to the rule of law as anyone in Kifaya. As for individual rights, the picture is more muddled. No groups’ rights have been more under attack in Egypt than the Islamists. On the other hand, they do have views on religious choice that would curtail certain individual rights. But we don’t have to assume that Egypt with Islamists in power (hopefully under a democratic system where they could lose it) would necessarily be as repressive as the Ayatollahs’ Iran.

A big issue I think here is whether ABdo might not be right about the opposition outside of CAiro> CErtainly there is one kind of oppostion movement here, pursuing lawsuits and demonstrations, and int’l attention, but that is not the entire scope of national discontent with Mubarak. I am not necessarily talking about the muslim brotherhood’s current official position, but about popular islamism. Outside of Cairo the islamist discontent with the regime seems far more prevalent than the kefaya type opposition. thoughts?