Tumgik
kalamatea · 10 years
Text
In Defense of Hypocrisy
     I was discussing the second season of “House of Cards” with a close friend the other evening when we both recalled something the series’ primary character, Frank Underwood, stated in an episode: “The road to power is paved with hypocrisy.”  What ensued was a brief and cynical conversation on the cutthroat nature of American – or, dare I say, all – politics.  But later that night it occurred to me that hypocrisy – a trait many of us view with no small amount of disgust – isn’t necessarily a bad thing.
     Don’t get me wrong.  I’m not talking about the deliberate, calculated hypocrisy of the arguably psychopathic characters of “House of Cards.”  But I think Frank’s quote is equally resonant when rephrased as: “The road to reform is paved with hypocrisy.”  How many of us change our choices and behavior the second we recognize our way of interacting with the world is inefficient or immoral?  The mind, I would argue, is easier to convince than the will.  Easier said than done, as the saying goes.  This doesn’t mean that we are forever trapped in a state of desiring change but never actually achieving it.  Sure, it may mean that for some, but for the rest of us, it means that we will undergo a period of transition in which we may not consistently practice what we preach.  In other words, hypocrisy is sometimes a symptom of a changed mind whose willpower hasn’t quite caught up yet.  Can it be symptomatic of other, less benign things?  Of course.  But next time you feel the urge to call someone a hypocrite, pause for self-assessment.  Few, if any, of us can claim to have never been one.  And maybe that’s a good thing.
0 notes
kalamatea · 10 years
Text
8 Things "The Square" Taught Me About Revolution
           Yesterday I watched Al Midan's "The Square," a documentary on the Egyptian Revolution of 2011, from the perspective of the people.  Here is what it taught me about modern-day revolution:
           The importance of…
1) UNITY
Tumblr media
     The injustices suffered under Mubarak’s regime were universal.   His dictatorship, erected and protected via the declaration of emergency law, led to human rights abuses that knew no party, religion, age, or sex.  No one was free from police brutality, economic disparities, or censorship, and this shared suffering served as a unifying factor.  “You are here as an individual, not as a member of the Muslim Brotherhood” was a line uttered from one protestor to another.  The importance of identity politics and party politics paled in comparison to the outrage generated by the shared suffering of the Egyptian people.
2) GOALS (of the Specific and Easily Definable Variety)
Tumblr media
     This is where the Occupy movement went wrong.  Although they quickly learned that it was to be the first of many steps toward achieving a fully democratic state, the Egyptians knew exactly what they wanted: the ousting of Mubarak and the end of the totalitarian regime.  There was no mincing or muddling of mission.  The way forward was clear, and the protestors had no trouble voicing their demands.  Instead of filling the streets with identity-driven chants (“We are the 99%”), they filled the streets with action-driven ones: “The people demand the downfall of the regime.”  No beating around the bush with that one.
3) SELF-POLICING
     The resistance rested upon a platform that encouraged nonviolent, civil disobedience, even if it couldn’t always enforce it.  In order to enter Tahrir Square or to join a sit-in, Egyptian civilians had to submit to a security check.  I will be the first to admit that this could have gone wrong, opening a window for potential protestor-on-protestor abuse, but it worked in 2011.  Not only did it help minimize outbreaks of violence, but the resistance also demonstrated its consistent commitment to its own platform and thereby protected the legitimacy and mission of the movement.
4) COMMUNITY BUILDING
Tumblr media
     Something that I always find refreshing when watching footage of revolutionary movements is that the arts are hardly ever denounced as a distraction or a waste of time.  Painting and spoken word are used to disseminate and popularize the agenda, and song is used as a morale-booster.  Artists are recognized and appreciated for their contributions, just as the strategists and orators are.  “A revolution without dancing is not a revolution worth having,” is a phrase often attributed to anarchist Emma Goldman, and of course she was right.  Any revolution that prohibits free expression has no true interest in expanding liberty and is inherently undemocratic.
5) COUNTER-FRAMING
Tumblr media
      Within this same vein of free expression, we find the necessity of counter-framing.  Mass media often attempts to quell rebellion by defaming and further denigrating movements, advertising the extreme actions of the few as opposed to the reasonable actions of the many.  Counter-framing via popular media becomes intrinsic to the maintenance and growth of movement support, as does drawing the world’s eye via global social media platforms (most notably Twitter, in the case of the Egyptian revolution).  Sure, the reliability and ethicality of guerilla journalism are questionable at best, but there’s no question that it serves well to garner foreign attention (and sympathies).
6) SACRIFICE
Tumblr media
     This one is a given, but it’s the one would-be revolutionaries tend to struggle with the most.  Simply put, nothing will change unless you do.  Gandhi wasn’t spewing feel-good nonsense when he pushed all of us to “be the change.”  This requires the willingness and ability to give up certain comforts, and the definition of “comfort,” unfortunately, sometimes extends to “life.”  Death and imprisonment were risks millions of Egyptian citizens faced on their quest to self-determination.  Some jeopardized everything for the sake of their children, some for the sake of democratization, but all participated in the name of ideals they considered more valuable than their personal safety.
7) CONSTANT VIGILANCE (a.k.a. Persistence)
     The Egyptians didn’t rest on their laurels after Mubarak’s downfall.  Far from it.  Expected alongside President Mubarak’s resignation was the replacement of the totalitarian regime with a democratic, more fully representative one.  The perpetuation of the dictatorship hid shallowly beneath military rule, and the Muslim Brotherhood teetered on theocracy, deviating from the more secular vision of the people.  It was well-known that both the military and the Muslim Brotherhood had held political positions of power prior to the revolution.  Thus, neither stood on a platform that accurately reflected that of the protestors, who emphasized the need for a leader with conscience over a leader with an easily identifiable political identity.  “I don’t care if he’s a Jew,” one rebel stated.  “We just want a decent man to rule with justice.”  The protestors were quick to recognize the dual betrayal and to retake Tahrir Square.
8) NONVIOLENCE
Tumblr media
     This is perhaps the most remarkable take-away from the film.  “It was a war,” one of the protestors said, referring to the violent measures taken by the military to disperse the protestors post-resignation.  “Not a revolution.”  What immediately struck me was that the young man felt the need to make a distinction.  The Arab Spring as a whole (but particularly the Egyptian revolution) is commonly thought of as one of many civil disobedience success stories, but revolution as a peaceful means of sociopolitical reform is, as far as I know, a fairly recent phenomenon.  That being said, I hope it’s a trend that’s here to stay.
7 notes · View notes