went to vote in the elections at the sports club I belong to and found crowds of club members who had come on their day off to stand in long lines to elect new board members. I had an idea and started asking the club members if they voted in parliamentary or presidential elections. Most of those I asked looked at me with scorn and said they never took part in government elections because they are rigged, and some of them said they were not registered to vote in the first place. The truth is as clear as the sun in Egypt: a despotic and oppressive regime, which has failed and which has monopolized power for thirty years by means of repression and fraud until Egypt has hit rock bottom in all spheres of life, is asking people to take part in rigged elections in order to obtain fraudulent and superficial legitimacy. So boycotting the coming elections is the proper position. Simple Egyptians will boycott the elections because they do not want official posts; they do not dream of becoming members of parliament, they do not have investments they are frightened of losing, and they do not have friendly relations with the security agencies.
Some weeks ago we were reading in the newspapers about debates in the political parties over whether to boycott the elections or take part. The question to ask here is: Is there a single guarantee that real elections will take place? Has the regime given any commitment not to rig them and, even if it did, has this regime ever met any of its commitments? What’s the point of any party going into elections when it knows in advance they will be rigged? They say they will take part in the elections in order to put the government to shame, but hasn’t the government been shamed enough times already? Besides, what are these parties and what have they done in recent decades for the millions of poor people? What have the parties done to prevent torture, repression, and corruption? The answer is zilch, nothing. Most of these parties are paper puppets on strings held by the regime. Some of the party leaders cooperate with the security agencies and some of them are such favorites of the regime (which they claim to oppose) that they are appointed members of the upper house of parliament. So their position is worthless if they take part in rigged elections in return for one or two seats in a parliament that has lost legitimacy.
It would be truly regrettable if the Muslim Brotherhood were implicated in taking part in rigged elections. It seems that the Brotherhood is destined never to learn from its mistakes. Anyone who reads the history of the Brotherhood will be amazed at the vast difference between its nationalist positions against foreign occupation and its attitudes toward despotism. The Brotherhood played an honorable and important role in the Palestine war of 1948, led the Egyptian resistance against the British in the Suez Canal towns in 1951, and set a fine example of sacrifice and courage. But, sadly, in most of its positions on domestic matters the Brotherhood has put the organization’s interests before the interests of the nation and has invariably stood on the side of despotism. It supported King Farouk and Prime Minister Ismail Sidki, the butcher of the people. It backed Abdel Nasser when he abolished parliamentary life. It supported President Anwar Sadat and overlooked his repressive measures. When it comes to the possibility of President Hosni Mubarak passing the presidency to his son, Gamal, some Muslim Brothers have made vague and ambiguous statements that can be read in conflicting ways. If the Brotherhood does take part in the coming elections, it will be giving this iniquitous regime a fraudulent legitimacy it desperately needs and will play the role of the wretched extra in a drama for which all Egyptians will pay the price.
Those who advocate for taking part in the elections fall into three groups: they are either simpletons who do not understand what is happening around them, people
Some weeks ago we were reading in the newspapers about debates in the political parties over whether to boycott the elections or take part. The question to ask here is: Is there a single guarantee that real elections will take place? Has the regime given any commitment not to rig them and, even if it did, has this regime ever met any of its commitments? What’s the point of any party going into elections when it knows in advance they will be rigged? They say they will take part in the elections in order to put the government to shame, but hasn’t the government been shamed enough times already? Besides, what are these parties and what have they done in recent decades for the millions of poor people? What have the parties done to prevent torture, repression, and corruption? The answer is zilch, nothing. Most of these parties are paper puppets on strings held by the regime. Some of the party leaders cooperate with the security agencies and some of them are such favorites of the regime (which they claim to oppose) that they are appointed members of the upper house of parliament. So their position is worthless if they take part in rigged elections in return for one or two seats in a parliament that has lost legitimacy.
It would be truly regrettable if the Muslim Brotherhood were implicated in taking part in rigged elections. It seems that the Brotherhood is destined never to learn from its mistakes. Anyone who reads the history of the Brotherhood will be amazed at the vast difference between its nationalist positions against foreign occupation and its attitudes toward despotism. The Brotherhood played an honorable and important role in the Palestine war of 1948, led the Egyptian resistance against the British in the Suez Canal towns in 1951, and set a fine example of sacrifice and courage. But, sadly, in most of its positions on domestic matters the Brotherhood has put the organization’s interests before the interests of the nation and has invariably stood on the side of despotism. It supported King Farouk and Prime Minister Ismail Sidki, the butcher of the people. It backed Abdel Nasser when he abolished parliamentary life. It supported President Anwar Sadat and overlooked his repressive measures. When it comes to the possibility of President Hosni Mubarak passing the presidency to his son, Gamal, some Muslim Brothers have made vague and ambiguous statements that can be read in conflicting ways. If the Brotherhood does take part in the coming elections, it will be giving this iniquitous regime a fraudulent legitimacy it desperately needs and will play the role of the wretched extra in a drama for which all Egyptians will pay the price.
Those who advocate for taking part in the elections fall into three groups: they are either simpletons who do not understand what is happening around them, people