For years Egyptians have been caught in the dilemma of choosing between their freedom or their daily bread, and whether they should sacrifice the former for the latter.
This equation was the hallmark of the 1950s and 1960s when the regime promoted a “Bread First policy to achieve its illusive “economic development which, alas, turned out to be a big lie.
Strange enough, despite Egypt’s economic difficulties following the Nasser era, the masses didn’t rise up in anger, not because they didn’t feel the bite of hunger and destitution, but because the Nasserist regime distracted people with moral compensation through the emotional appeal of mega national projects, and the lure of Pan-Arabism.
But now the equation has been reversed and the slogan has changed to “Bread and Freedom together . Despite the exceptional performance of the Nazif government which achieved the best growth rate since the 1952 revolution, according to international economic organizations, the bitter truth is that if the current cabinet has really succeeded with flying colors and has attracted an unprecedented rate of Foreign Direct Investment, then why isn’t the ordinary Egyptian citizen satisfied?
It’s not because discontentment has become ingrained in the Egyptian psyche, but because of the overriding lack of confidence in the government.
People have also rethought the decades-old “freedom or bread? equation and have decided that its time to demand both.
Egyptians no longer believe they need to sacrifice one for the other because they now see a single entity. Thus the Egyptian regime – especially those elite sectors of it concerned with setting the economic reform agenda – urgently needs to genuinely open up the political sphere.
Deception and duplicity will no longer work, especially in light of the heightened degree of political awareness, unprecedented in the past three decades. Those who now demand their right to the loaf of bread, also command the freedom to demonstrate and criticize the government.
Without opening the doors for more political activity and giving both youth and civil society the right to criticize and express diverse points of view, Egyptians will never feel the benefits of economic reform. That’s because they perceive this reform as merely a means of supporting a small group of businessmen who seek a power transition that would give their personal interests priority over the public interest.
Egyptians have only two demands from the government: first, to remedy the adverse social effects of the recent economic reforms; and second, to improve the political climate with real structural changes that would give people hope in a healthier political future.
I wonder what would happen if a minister was questioned inside the People’s Assembly? More dangerously, what if the PA gives a minister a no-confidence vote inside the council? And what if this corrupt official receives harsh punishment?
The most dangerous attitude to have vis-à-vis a society going through political and ideological transition – as is the case in Egypt – is to dismiss its ability to affect change.
As the saying goes, “You can fool some of the people all of the time, and all of the people some of the time, but you cannot fool all of the people all of the time.
Khalil Al-Anani is an expert on Political Islam and Deputy Editor of Al Siyassa Al Dawliya journal published by Al-Ahram Foundation.
