Suchergebnisse

"A multivocal account of why Egypt's defeated revolution remains a watershed in the country's political history. "Bread and Freedom" offers a new account of Egypt's 2011 revolutionary mobilization, based on a documentary record hidden in plain sight--party manifestos, military communiqués, open letters, constitutional contentions, protest slogans, parliamentary debates, and court decisions. A rich trove of political arguments, the sources reveal a range of actors vying over the fundamental question in politics: who holds ultimate political authority. The revolution's tangled events engaged competing claims to sovereignty made by insurgent forces and entrenched interests alike, a vital contest that was terminated by the 2013 military coup and its aftermath. Now a decade after the 2011 Arab uprisings, Mona El-Ghobashy rethinks how we study revolutions, looking past causes and consequences to train our sights on the collisions of revolutionary politics. She moves beyond the simple judgments that once celebrated Egypt's revolution as an awe-inspiring irruption of people power or now label it a tragic failure. Revisiting the revolutionary interregnum of 2011-2013, "Bread and Freedom" takes seriously the political conflicts that developed after the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak, an eventful thirty months when it was impossible to rule Egypt without the Egyptians."

The political science scholarly consensus has long held up Egypt as a paradigm case of "authoritarian resilience." Analysts emphasized the Mubarak regime's shrewd manipulation of elections, strangling of NGOs, and instrumentalization of protest to shore up its power. This narrative was momentarily disrupted during Egypt's 2011 to 2013 revolutionary situation, but reappeared unchanged after the July 2013 military coup. A Dynamics of Contention ( DoC) perspective sees the political world through different lenses. Where "authoritarian resilience" sees stability, DoC sees dynamism. "Authoritarian resilience" and similar social science models start with pre-constituted political actors, whereas DoC investigates how new political actors emerge and interact during episodes of contention. This article identifies three sites of contention that developed over the 30-year span of the Mubarak regime—elections; street protests, and legal mobilization—sketching how changing dynamics within these sites help us make sense of Egyptian politics before and after 2011.

This article tackles the problem of political—institutional change in undemocratic regimes commonly considered impervious to meaningful political contention. Egypt is one of the contemporary world's most stolid authoritarian regimes, a superpresidential system in which all effective power resides in the executive. It has been governed by uninterrupted emergency law since 1981 and since 1992 has experienced a further process of political deliberalization. Simultaneously, Egyptian politics have witnessed the rise of new political actors: courts, human rights organizations, and professional associations. What explains such manifestations of political dynamism in the midst of political stasis? This article contends that two processes of legal mobilization and internationalization have interacted to produce revived courts, new human rights organizations, and transformed professional unions. This interpretation departs from the emphasis on authoritarian resilience in the Middle East, advancing a more relational conception of state—society relations.

Jihane al-Halafawi's small apartment above a barbershop in Alexandria is exceedingly orderly, a cool oasis on a sweltering summer afternoon. Plant leaves brush up against curtains undulating with the breeze from the nearby Mediterranean. As she walks into the living room with a tray full of cakes and tea, al-Halafawi is the picture of a kindly Egyptian mother, a genuine smile gracing her youthful face. But when this fifty-year-old mother of six and grandmother announced her candidacy for Egypt's parliamentary elections in fall 2000, the state geared up a massive security force outside polling stations; leftists shrugged her off as a "front" for her husband; and state feminists dedicated to the electoral empowerment of women were silent. When Halafawi outperformed her ruling-party rival in the first round, despite rigging, the Interior Ministry promptly stepped in and canceled the results on the pretext of respecting an earlier court ruling postponing the elections.

One of the greatest challenges we face as political scientists is to teach undergraduates how to think comparatively. This article proposes a number of practical, easily adaptable exercises that many of us can incorporate in our teaching to turn curious undergraduates into smart social scientists who think comparatively about the world.

One of the greatest challenges we face as political scientists is to teach undergraduates How to think comparatively. This article proposes a number of practical, easily adaptable exercises that many of us can incorporate in our teaching to turn cur10us undergraduates into smart social scientists who think comparatively about the world. Adapted from the source document.