Final Response

Overall, I feel like I've taken away a good bit of knowledge from this class. I've improved my understanding of the MENA region and how social movements can occur. This class has also reaffirmed my plans to one day work in the Middle East as a human rights actor. I had honestly never heard of civil society before this class, so that's one topic of which I definitely amassed a lot of information. I found our discussions interesting, but often felt less informed that some others in the class. I came into the course with very little knowledge of the area, including names of groups and political leaders, so I was often confused in the beginning of the course. I thoroughly enjoyed the documentary we just watched about the steps a country can take to bring down a dictatorship- I felt like it was a culmination of everything we've learned in class. Some of the main things I've learned from this course are about how small groups can amass into an effective grassroots organizations, how Orientalist discourses can skew Middle Eastern-US perceptions, and quite a lot about Saudi Arabia. I thought the country brief projects were useful, particularly when working on the final presentation, and helped apply the concepts we were learning in class. I'm glad I took this class, and I hope to continue learning about the MENA region with my newly crafted lens of which to view it.

Final Reflection

Although I did think the material for this class was a bit confusing at the beginning of the semester, I have found by the end that I do have a better understanding of non-violent social movements in the MENA region. You never really stop and think about the mechanics and planning behind the revolutions in Tunisia, Iran, Serbia, and Egypt. The media does a good job of portraying these types of movements as sudden, yet successful ones, when careful planning is actually used and carried out for months. I found it extremely interesting to see how similar ways in which to stage a non-violent social movement can be found throughout the world, and how much more successful it can be than using violence. Overall, this class was very interesting, and I enjoyed it greatly.

Reflection 10

Earlier this week, Al Jazeera ran a feature on Tunisian President Marzouki, winner of the 2012 Chatham House award as the world’s most influential statesperson and the impetus behind the country’s peaceful transition to what seems to be the roots of a substantive democracy.  Tunisia is probably best known as the “birthplace” of the Arab Spring when the self-immolation of Mohamed Bouzazi on December 17, 2010 sparked an intensive civil resistance campaign which led to the ousting of longtime President Zine El Abidine Ben Ali in January 2011.  Unlike similar revolutions in the Arab Spring, Tunisia experienced democratization and free and elections in a participatory republican system.  

The author, Yasmine Ryan, who also interviewed the Tunisian president, lauded Marzouki for remaining committed to protecting human rights and democratic principles amidst a region “accustomed to strongmen.”  The author also praises Marzouki’s refusal to accept the deep secular-Islamist divide that currently undermines the foundations of Egypt's revolution. According to Ryan, “It is a choice that has earned him considerable criticism from other secularists, including within his own movement.”  

While I have all the respect in the world for Mr. Marzouki as a fearless leader committed to human rights advocacy and a true democrat, I think Ms. Ryan is overlooking the role of civil society and Tunisia’s history of political cooperation in its relatively peaceful and swift transition to democracy.  A two-level discourse between civil society and Troika, the coalition  between the centre-right Ennahdha, Marzouki's centre-left Congress for the Republic (CPR) and centre-left Ettakatol, has been active in Tunisia for some time.  Both civil society actors and Troika have a “shared commitment to establishing a free and democratic political system, bringing together what he describes as moderate secularists and moderate Islamists.” According to Alfred Stepan, an expert in democratic transitions "the Troika did not come into existence after the election, it was prepared for a very very long time, over a period of 20 years.”

Tunisia civil society has been gaining traction in recent years and is working to develop frameworks to oversee the transition process and act as a counterweight to political parties and transitional institutions. It is important that their role in a peaceful and effective transition to substantive democracy is not overlooked.

Reflection 9

Earlier this week, France became the first Western state to recognize the legitimacy of Syria’s opposition as the representative of the Syrian people.  “I announce today that France recognizes the Syrian National Council as the sole representative of the Syrian people, and as the future government of a democratic Syria bringing an end to Bashar Assad’s regime,” stated French President Francois Hollande in a press conference.  France’s decision (and now Turkey’s as of a few minutes ago) to recognize the opposition as the sole representative of the Syrian people marks a serious shift in the crisis in Syria.  The SNC, which represents the coalition of forces fighting Assad, could be considered a social movement (at least at its inception) and this represents the stage of social movement theory known as “success.” Recognition by France marks a major success for the opposition because with recognition comes funds and possibly weapons.  Though it had to evolve to react to a violent state crackdown and turn to violence itself, it started out as a peaceful social movement whose aims are still peaceful.  Through all of its stages, it has followed the social movement progression and will hopefully achieve its goal of a Syria sans Assad.

Structured Response

When covering and reflecting on the Arab Revolts of 2011, the news media placed a gigantic emphasis on the role of social media tools in the various movements and revolutions.  It seemed as though the news media were surprised by the widespread use of twitter, Facebook, and other social media tools and their effectiveness. However, I would have been more surprised had protestors and organizers not used social media. We have seen that social movements have utilized relatively new organizing tools effectively (OTPOR used the burgeoning internet to topple Milosevic), so it is no surprise that Arab protestors made use of Facebook and Twitter, both of which had been popular for years.

One unforeseen repercussion of the “Twitter Revolutions” or whatever they’re called these days is that the fact that social media was so effective may have obfuscated the causes and outcomes of the protests themselves. Rather, bystanders to these revolutions came away from 2011 knowing that Twitter was effective, but had no idea which people in which state were protesting what, and what the outcomes were.  Lech Walesa and the Solidarity movement used new technologies to aid their protests, but their goals and results were better documented than their methods.

Reflection #9

Today I was down at the State Department with my UC class, and I learned that the Sate Department's duty was to be the face of the United States to other countries. This made me think, how do other countries like my research country, Morocco, show themselves to the world? I decided to look at Morocco and figured this would be where their civil society groups would come into play. What I found was that they are mostly focused on the local aspects of their country and trying to increase the standards of their society (e.g. women's rights, youth policies, etc.).

 I'm under the assumption that all states provide some form of foreign aid around the world, and I wonder why places like Morocco keep so quiet about it. This is possibly due to the fact that I am trying to research this through American search sites where almost everything is about U.S.- Moroccan relations and nothing about Moroccan relations with anywhere else in the world. If anything, I believe that could be a problem as to why Americans so rarely know what other countries are doing because we don't report about it or have it come up on our internet unless it somehow relates to us. Is this the United States just being vain or is there a method to our madness?  

Response #9

Today my UC class went to the State Department and the spokesperson there actually briefly touched on how media affected the Arab Spring and other people's revolts in the MENA region. He mentioned how people discuss the use of mainstream media through sites like Facebook and Twitter to mobilize the masses as if it were something entirely brand new, but he claimed it isn't. He believed that it could have happened regardless, and that it would have been more interesting and exciting if the uprisings had occurred without the media. While I respected the spokesperson's opinion, I don't see how the revolts could have happened any other way.

In this day and age, everyone uses the internet. Most people wouldn't know how to function without it, so it only makes sense that the revolutions gained the power it did through the most actively visited place in the world. Not only that, but the internet is the one place government does not have total control over what is published, there's just too much being posted online for the state to track and shut down compared to other outlets like the newspaper. Almost every aspect of life can be found online now, social movement groups are just taking advantage of it and increasing their size through the media. It's globalization at its finest.

Reflection9-Hayley

We have just finished our last country brief, so I thought I would talk about the experience of writing them, and working with a group. Over time, our group created a strategy that we thought worked really well. The first Tuesday, our group would break up which parts we would research, and then work together to find all the necessary information. The following Tuesday, we would write up our research and put it together into one Country Brief. After starting the power points, we realized that they were very helpful because they helped us figure out what was needed to say to the group. Before everyone started doing a powerpoint, it could be confusing what we wanted to say. Plus, the other groups didn't necessarily understand the information we were presenting. By using a powerpoint, we were ABLE to focus what each person was going to say, as well as make clear the information we thought was important. Over the weeks, we developed the best way for us to get our work done, because we are always finished before Wed. night. I had a great experience with my Bahrain group, discovering that Bahrain is not as equal as I thought it was, as well as learning to cooperate and coordinate with a group in college.

Structured Response 6

Without social media, I believe the Arab revolutions still would have taken place. According to the Goldstone reading, there are 4 components needed to precede revolution: an unjust government that the people view as a threat to the future, an elite/ military class that no longer is willing to defend the country, a broad based section of the population that mobilizes, and international powers that refuse to step in. He goes on to argue that social media is only a tool utilized when all of these are in place that then allows uprisings to be more productive. The media in addition to revolutionary conditions and the inability of a state to control an upsurge is what fosters change- media is not a sole condition.

As it is useful as a tool, social media is best described by an Egyptian protester as, “We use Facebook to schedule the protests, Twitter to coordinate, and Youtube to tell the world.” This shows how new media was not used to fight the regime, but instead as an organizational/ planning device. It allowed more people to become involved and created an atmosphere for people to discuss and plan out opinions and revolutionary tactics. Though social media was probably not a necessary factor for the revolutions of 2011 to happen, they helped to quicken and increase the effectiveness of the movements. 

Reflection #9

Monday night I went to a panel discussion in the SIS building regarding Israeli-Iranian relations. It's obvious that this issue is of much concern to the MENA region and the United States as well. There were four panelists who spoke, each with differing views on Iran's possibility of acquiring a nuclear weapon. One man, clearly of Middle Eastern descent, spoke about preconceived notions of Iran are making the United States believe that there is no doubt Iran is building a nuclear weapon. He claimed that because of problems with Iran and the U.S in the 1970's, the U.S sees Iran in a bad light, thus assuming they are acquiring nuclear weapons. He continued to say that there is also a difference in acquiring nuclear "power" and nuclear weapons. What he thinks Iran seems to be doing is exercising it's rights to create nuclear power, not for military reasons, however. Contrary to his belief, the other three panelists believes that evidence leads the U.S to assume that Iran is, in fact, acquiring a nuclear weapon. I'm not sure what my opinion is on this matter quite yet, considering both arguments seem valid and understandable. I do think, however, that if Iran were to actually acquire a nuclear weapon, whatever that maybe, that it would not benefit the MENA region (specifically Israel), the U.S, or Iran itself whatsoever. I'm no expert on the matter, but acquiring nuclear weapons is a collective goods problem, and I have no doubt that Iran's actions would influence other countries to follow suit, making this a dangerous global issue.

Structured Responce 6-Hayley

After reading the articles about Social Media I have come to the conclusion that in today's global society, social media is a helpful, if not necessary tool to have a successful revolution. As stated by Khondker, social media opens free spaces. Previously, only standard media such as television and radio broadcasts were the source of information. If a revolution wanted to be successful, they had to utilize all the free space possible. With the new forms of social media such as Twitter and Facebook, social movements can use these to spread ideas, collaborate effective strategies,and devise meeting times for protests. Also, social media can be an effective source to reach other countries, whose citizens could provide another source of support. Social media is such a part of modern society that it would seem difficult to have an effective social movement without utilizing them.

As seen in the case of Tunisia, a social movement may fail if it cannot effectively use social media. According to Khondker, there were only 28,000 Tunisian members of Facebook, and thus Facebook could not have been effectively used to affect change. There was a significant lack of Tunisian Twitter members as well, thus suggesting that in a modern society, social media is needed to have a successful social movement. In a country where internet access is not widely used, or in the case of extreme online censorship, social media will not be effective, and less advanced ,methods may be  needed.

When I say less advanced, I don't mean more primitive, but I mean the methods used by previous movements such as Iran in 1979, or in Serbia in the Otpor! movement of the late 90s early 00s. Otpor! did not need social media, as they used a well connected social network that existed offline. They used rallies to gain supporters, and had a large campaign where members spread the Otpor! message.

While I understand that some countries do not have wide access to the internet, their social movements will have a more difficult time. However, it is possible for a social movement to be successful without social media, it is just more difficult.

Reflection 9

This week, I had the opportunity to go and listen to Prince Turki bin Faisal al-Saud of Saudi Arabia. I found it incredibly interesting, and I was also really glad that Saudi Arabia is the country I picked for my country team. Without the knowledge I’ve acquired through country briefs, I would’ve been very confused about some of the topics being discussed and would have no idea on many of the issues and questions raised. Overall, I found Prince Turki to be quite the politician. He glossed over some of the less desirable aspects of Saudi society while emphasizing what a great country and all of the improvements Saudi Arabia is making. He stressed the importance of youth: whether it be education, employment, or equal rights. The youth population is extremely large and overwhelmingly underemployed. Prince Turki spoke of how great US-Saudi relations are because of our colleges that allow 17,000 students from Saudi to study in the states, leading to a better chance for them to find jobs. As Emily mentioned in her reflection of the same event, quite a few people in the room were visibly upset when he said that an education for a woman is a means used to get a husband. He seemed to avoid questions that showed a negative side of Saudi, and instead kept mentioning how the country is moving forward towards modernization. I was very surprised when an observer asked him how he felt about Bahrain banning all forms of protest (a ban currently in effect in Saudi as well). He answered by simply commenting on how the government must do what it can to protect its people- and quickly moved to the next question. The event was informative on Saudi society and helpful for me to see how leaders and politicians can easily talk their way out of an uncomfortable subject.

Reflection 8

The Bahraini people have been engaged in revolts since the beginning of the Arab spring in late 2010 to early 2011. These demonstrations have not been revolutionary, rather they aim for deep political reforms such as a constitutional monarchy with an empowered parliament, an elected government, and an end to gerrymandering that has left Bahrain’s poor Shiite majority disenfranchised.  The Bahraini state has used violence to combat opposition groups and just today revoked the citizenship of 31 people including exiled political activists and former opposition members.  According to the opposition, every person on the list is part of Bahrain’s Shiite majority and the decision, which will render the majority of these people stateless, was made without due process of law.

In class we discussed gender-biased nationality legislation that is prominent in the MENA region. We used the example of Lebanon’s discriminatory family code that renders children stateless in circumstances such as divorce or death of a father when the mother is not Lebanese.  Statelessness is a major concern in the MENA region that affects hundreds of thousands of stateless persons. As of now, I could not find any evidence of internal Bahraini civil society groups calling for the release of these former citizens; most of the pressure is coming from outside NGOs such as Human Rights Watch, to which the Bahraini state does not have a record of listening. 

Reflection #8

       Just as we have recently re-elected president Obama, Saudi Arabia welcomed their new interior minster, Prince Mohammed bin Nayef. Prince Mohammed bin Nayef is the son of the late Prince Nayef, members of Saudi ruling family. Something I never realized though is that we have the exact same situations in America, just on a more subtle scale. So many of people in government come from well-to-do families, they're just not as prominent as the families in the MENA region. It seems that ruling families are always in the forefront  of civil society and the state, and in the United States people never know of candidates' lineages until they look them up. I wonder if there is a stronger sense of following family lines in the Middle East.   

Reflection 8

So, you may have heard about it- but the United States has re-elected President Barack Obama! The domestic coverage of the event has been substantial, but I really haven’t seen much in terms of foreign responses. I found a short article on The Guardian that summed up some of the Middle Eastern attitudes and reactions (or lack thereof). After talking about the graph which demonstrated how the majority of other countries wanted Obama to win in class last Thursday, I was surprised to see the apathy discussed in the article. “There is no sense that the incumbent's second term offers the same sort of hope that his first did, four years ago. With the region now in turmoil, few seem to believe the leader of the world's largest economy and most powerful military has the will to do much about the situation.”

Egypt offered congratulations and a hope of further negotiations and a stronger friendship between the nations. Lebanon was relatively neutral, and both Iran and Syria have been (shockingly) silent. Because of Obama’s stance with the Egyptian protesters, many Gulf states decided to favor Romney for the election. There was one quote that I found rather interesting from a senior Turkish official:  "We expected more from them (The United States over the previous 4 years). Even now, I'm not sure they want to lead. Let's hope they do." While the US is often portrayed as a world leader, do other countries expect that of us? Do they assume we’ll always intervene in their domestic issues and create a better situation? If they look at history, perhaps they should reevaluate that stance. Anyways- I thought some countries in the MENA region would have more to say about their reactions to our election. I found the lack of public statements made by Middle Eastern officials to mean that they many not expect much, particularly seeing as how we’re in the same political position.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2012/nov/07/middle-east-reaction-obama-election-victory

Reflection 8-Hayley

Orientalism with a surgical twist is an article on Al Jazeera about the Orientalist ideology in connection with Beirut. The author,Belen Fernandez, mentions numerous works that use Orientalism to describes Beirut society. The article condemns these works which state that Beirut women are materialistic and "buxom, Cleopatra-eyed Lebanese girls". The article also cites Orientalist authors who claim that Beirut is the Paris of the East, and is surrounded by unmodernized Islamic countries. The article then claims that this trend has continued today, with an increase in plastic surgery to better one's appearance. While some commenters believed that Fernandez was claiming all of these stereotypes to be true of the city, she was doing quite the opposite. She is saying that all of these stereotypes are based off of Said's "Orientalism". There are many reasons why Beirut might be a well-off commercial city. Because it is a city, Beirut has more access to global ideas such as materialism. Plus, the beauty industry has a huge hold over cities where one believes everyone is cosmopolitan. It should be interesting that a city in the Middle East has a materialistic culture, because that is a global phenomenon that transcends regions in the world. I hope that I am becoming more aware of Orientalism, and hopefully I can see around it to discover the truth behind this facade.

http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/10/201210311055370407.html

Reflection #8

        Last night I went to a showing of the documentary, Follow Me: The Yoni Netanyahu Story . It was about the oldest brother of Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, and his life long dedication to the safety and success of Israel. Yoni began serving in the Israeli Army when he was 18, like any other 18 year old Israeli. At age 16, he moved to the United States, only to move back to Israeli himself to serve his state. Yoni is most recognized for his sacrifice while saving the Israeli citizens held against their will in the Entebbe hostage crisis in Uganda. For those of you who have never heard of it, a flight from France to Israel was hijacked by Palestinian terrorists with the help of Ugandan supporters. 

Yoni was part of “The Unit”, a special forces unit that was chosen specifically to work on this operation. Out of the small group of dedicated Israeli men to risk their lives to save these innocent civilians, Yoni was the only man to die. What makes Yoni’s story remarkable, however, was his letters to his loved ones throughout his time in the army, that described his longing to be home, his sense of nationalism for his homeland, and also his fear and sadness that accompanies war. 

Most of us have seen enough war movies and documentaries to understand the tragedies and stress of war. The immense consequences of it, however, did not become real to me until some of Yoni’s letters were read in the documentary. It amazes me that people are willing to sacrifice their lives for the preservation and safety of their country or state. This got me thinknig back to the many revolutionary movements we’ve been studying these past few months in Serbia, Egypt, Libya, and Iran. Even though the type of war waged by movements in these countries was different than the type of war I learned about in the documentary, both were marked by a sense of nationalism and a desire for freedom. In my eyes, the will of people to fight for their land, with or without violence, is truly remarkable. 

Reflection 7

So it seems the topic du jour is Said’s Orientalism once again (I suspect it’s inspired by 1:07 of Shit AU Kids Say).  As SIS students, we are quick to try to remove ourselves from pervasive American thought and claim that, as enlightened college freshmen, we are able bypass Said’s lens and become completely objective observers when studying the Middle East. Believe me, I know. I am a huge perpetrator of this perhaps noble yet certainly futile endeavor.  Feel free to look through my recent posts; you’ll see glaring examples of me trying to comment on and judge events in MENA society through Said’s lens. Even my comments on Orientalism hold true to this rule, as does this reflection on my previous reflections on class discussion.  This relates to our class discussion from a few weeks ago when we discussed the merits of perceived expertise in a particular field based solely on an innate connection with that field. For example, asking a political science professor at an American institution to comment on recent developments in Bhutan because she happens to be Bhutanese.  Are these people the only people who are allowed (if we think it is preferable not to view the world through a Said-like lens) to comment or be an expert on anything? Does this render the study of all things foreign a futile endeavor?

Reflection #7

Before the hurricane took over everything, I was researching the public's reactions to the change in Morocco's constitution and its reforms. I was rather surprised by what I found. It seems that the vast majority of people think the policy reforms are just facades and that the king hasn't lost any power in the state. I hope that what I've learned so far about the policy changes is real, and that the media hasn't been feeding false information, but if so, then Morocco is pulling the most elaborate illusion ever. However, opposition groups have calmed down in their demonstrations, so maybe there really is some change happening after all. 

The reason I chose Morocco in the first place was because I felt it was the most moderate of the countries in the MENA region, which I assume was based off my Orientalist-affected view coming into the class. To think that they are possibly more sneaky than the other countries disappoints me because that would make them the worst country, government wise. At least in the other countries the corrupt officials are more transparent about it. Regardless, I still have faith that the policy changes will be made into effect and that change will be seen, it just may take a little longer than what the people have patience for. 

Reflection 7-Hayley

After finishing up the next country brief for Bahrain, my group discovered some disturbing news. According to a CNN article, Bahrain has banned all public protests on claims that protesters are increasingly becoming violent. The governments hopes that violence will lessen after this ban. After reading another reflection, I got the idea to read the comments on this article, and see the differing sides of the American opinion.

The first few comments I read stated that the US would not intervene between Bahrain and its people. Currently, there is a US Naval Fleet headquarters on Bahrain, and commentators are suggesting that America does not want to lose its main headquarters in the Middle East.

As one Commenter said, "Bahrain plays a key strategic role in the Middle East and is home to the U.S. Navy's Fifth Fleet headquarters."

LOOOOL.... nothing major lol..... just having a massive fleet there and army bases and military stuff... nothing to see here.... just plain democracy, please move on to the next article... go watch the mainpage, there is probably something on syria.... hush about bahrain ;)"

Personally, I believe that  this comment is too harsh on America. Although I understand that this commenter believes that America is selfish when it comes to International Politics, and I partly agree, America also believes in human rights. Bahrain is violating its citizens rights, and I doubt that America will just ignore this, as Bahraini citizens are further limited by their government.

However, not all commentators agree that Bahrain is in the wrong. As another commented stated,"The ban is temporary and not permanent so what's the big deal! These demonstrations which are taking place on daily basis are very violent and unjustified and the government has the right to take such measures. What would the US and UK do if they had similar violent demonstrations on their streets? we are sick and tired of organizations such as Amnesty International looking at one side of the coin. The government of Bahrain should do what what it needs to do."

This comment is definitely biased. While one does have to respect that a government has a reason it makes tough decisions, I don't believe that all protests should be banned.  According to other sources, it is a select few who are turning protests violent, and many times the police are the first instigators of violence. In my World Politics class, we talked about "name and shame" which describes actions taken by NGO's to alert the world of countries who violate human rights. While these commentators have a lot to say, most of it is extreme, and must be taken with a grain of salt.

Structured Response 5

When comparing the United States to the MENA region in terms of democratization, I was actually quite surprised to find parallels. I assumed there would be very little in common, seeing as how one nation is fully democratized while the other region is mainly authoritarian. One parallel between the American democracy and MENA region is the focus on individual rights and government accountability. Through these aspects, the democratization by the civil society sector is enabled to promote democratic change. Though civil society has no real autonomy from regimes in place, groups and actors can argue and protest for changes that benefit society. Caratorta and Elananza propose that there are three steps to regime displacement- opening, breakthrough, and consolidation. This can be seen through many cases throughout history. Take for example the American Revolution: a group of unhappy citizens organized and broke through the regime, which later toppled and finalized a new ruling establishment. This process has the possibility for allowing change in the MENA region. Though currently stable in many areas, cracks must be found in MENA governments in order to democratize them. Once that occurs, the organized civil society groups can take charge and consolidate into a new form of government.  Social movements have influenced democratization in the US by allowing for change when the government ignored minorities. Through women’s rights, suffrage rights, civil rights, and now gay rights, social movements are/ have been the key to evoking real transformation of the system. Because of this, the potential role of social movements in the democratization process for the MENA area is quite possible. Social movements have the power to uproot governments and represent the people as they fight for democracy and freedom.

Reflection 7

After reading the clarification post regarding Orientalism, I then went to news articles about stories in the Middle East and did the dreaded: read the comments section. Though I expected to see many Arab stereotypes and anti-Islamism, I truly had no idea that so many people (in fact, the majority) expressed such Orientalist views. I know that most people who comment on these stories do so because they’re looking for controversy or to express a rather radical view, but I still was unprepared for some of the things I read. After skimming a few articles, I came across “'Heroic' Iran, 'resistive' Syria behind Sandy, pro-Assad group claims”- which I felt would have some interesting viewpoints. Even in the supposedly factual CNN article, there were tenants of Orientalism that could be traced. In essence, the article was about a pro-Syrian group that came out and declared that Sandy was due to “highly advanced technologies developed by the heroic Iranian regime that supports the resistance, with coordination of our resistive Syrian regime as punishment for whoever dares to attack Syria's (Bashar) al-Assad and threaten peace and stability." Yeah. It’s quotes like these and articles that exploit the voice of a few crazies that lead to such incorrect views of the MENA region in the West. Here are just a few of the comments from the first page (out of 30):

“Everything Islam has ever been involved in becomes a disaster, so they do have a point.”

“They said these people were nutjobs. I finally see it clearly now.”

“Middle eastern cultures have such a poetic way of displaying how beautifully intelligent, peaceful and advanced they are.”

“From camel and goat herders to secret impossible weather technology wow sure sounds like something out of the bible here LOL.”

One sane person:
“Shame on CNN for encouraging this anti-Muslim diatribe day in and day out, so that none of us can live in peace.”

Who was responded to by these lovely people:
“Your words are empty and false. The actions, or lack thereof  by Muslims speaks a whole lot clearer to the world. Proof of the violence and the silence of approval by Muslim leaders, clergy and the masses.”

“To be fair, the religion of Islam IS one of murder and terrorism. Sure, maybe what it has become was not the intention of Mohammed or the original creators of Islam...but that begs the question: Is the original purpose relevant if it has become something unstoppable and evil?”

Needless to say, I didn’t bother clicking to the second page of comments. I found it absolutely ridiculous that so many people say or actually think these things, and I believe something needs to be done in order to educate the masses and help lessen this ludicrous ignorance.

Response #7

It’s hard to consider the similarities between the United States, a clearly democratic nation, and the MENA region, a region labeled as unstable, violent, and oppressive. Yet, if you look at the process of democratization in terms of social movements and their influence on this process, both regions are rather similar. Without the women’s suffrage movement in the 1920’s, women today would not have the right to vote, and maybe even the right to hold office. In a broad sense, the women’s suffrage movement paved the way towards complete equality between women and men. 

Additionally, the civil rights movement during the 1950’s and 1960’s left an unforgettable mark on the United States. A race that was once dehumanized by the institution of slavery had a voice, and used it to fight for their rights to vote and to live a desegregated life. 

A social movement we see today in the United States is the fight for homosexual couples to have the right to marry. This is a fairly new social movement in my eyes, but has really grown in size and support over the last ten years. Citizens are pressing their congressmen and women to sign legislation in their states to legalize gay marriage, and states like Massachusetts and New York have already done so. This new issue on gay rights just proves that democracy in the U.S can still be improved, and social movements are playing an influential role in doing so. 

Although it may not seem apparent, the MENA region hosts similar social movements that are striving towards the same cause. As Professor Hardig mentioned in class a few times, the gay rights social movement in Lebanon is currently working towards the right for homosexual couples to legally marry. In addition, the women’s rights movement is slowly making headway in the MENA region, especially in Jordan and Pakistan. In Jordan, women have already been given the right to vote and hold office thanks to the National Committee for Women, created in 1996. In Pakistan, serious protection laws and women’s rights reforms are being put into place after the shooting of the young Pakistani girl by the Taliban. 

In regards to voters rights and representation, the MENA region has had considerable trouble with these issues in the past and present. Many of the protests during the Arab Spring were in response to faulty representation, voters rights, corruption, and an overall discontent with authoritarian regimes. Many social movements have tried to remove authoritarian rulings, putting into place more democratic ways of governing the countries in the region. Although the MENA region still has a long way to go before reaching the type of democracy seen in the United States, similar social movements are present in both regions that strive toward the same goal: democracy. 

Response #7

The United States was built on social movements, and it's interesting to think that we don't often see that connection between us and the MENA region. From the very beginning of when we created our government, we had movements and opposition groups against certain agendas and policies (i.e. Boston Tea Party in response to taxation without representation). The same can be said for the MENA region. They have held movements for and peaceful/and sometimes not so peaceful oppositions against rigged voting, suffrage rights, proper representation, etc. Social movements have shaped so much of the democracy the United States is today, and it is only a matter of time the MENA region fallows suit in their own way. They care just as much to have a proper working state as we do, and since the Arab Spring, it is obvious that they are working hard towards that, whether it's our cookie- cutter image of democratization or not.

Reflection #7

I thought Professor Hardig’s blog post clarifying civil society and political participation was extremely helpful and insightful. Personally, even after reading and researching civil societies in the MENA region, I feel as though I only understood the broad definition of the concept. At a basic level, I knew civil society consisted of grassroots organizations and associations that work towards improving some aspect of life for citizens in a country. This is only a baby definition of civil society, though. Throughout this course, we were taught that civil societies can (and have) played an influential role in democratization in the MENA region. Whether these civil societies are successful or not is a different story, however. When Hardig explained civil societies as a “space where various struggles take place”, I was able to understand the concept more clearly. Civil society is not just a “gateway” toward democratization. Sure, it can help the slow process toward democracy in the region, but that’s not what civil society fully entails. Like Hardig said, civil society is a “panacea for democratization”, and a place where “struggle takes place”; where actors make decisions and moves that will either negatively or positively affect the process democratization all together. 

Response #6

In this weeks readings, the Intifada that occurred in Palestine did not bring any form of 'peace' between themselves and Israel. Instead, it brought more paranoia and suppression against the Palestinian people from the Israelis. Whether economically, politically, or socially it seems the Israelis were highly threatened by the movement and reacted in the way they thought best: buckling down. While Intifada was meant to bring positive change and conflict resolution between the two actors, it only brought up more suspicion of one another and tore down any progress that might have been there before. In the end, this led for the Palestinians to feel frustrated and over powered and the Israelis put on the defense. This was probably one of the most highly covered back-firings of social movements ever.