This House believes that Arab revolutions will just produce different dictators

[Badlun]

This is very strange that in the whole Arab world we dont have a single democracy. All are monarchies and dictatorships. In the Muslim world we have only true democracy in Turkey, Malaysia and few others. Pakistan is becoming a better democracy while Afghanistan is also on the right track now.

Arab world cant resist the wave of democracy which made the Europe of dark ages into the developed world. Humanity got its freedom and human rights and rule of law are supreme. How Arab world in this modern era can be immune to this trend!

Very soon we will have democracies and secularism will prevail in the real sense of the word.

West should no more support the dictators in their larger self interest as now even in the Arab world the national interest for the developed world is in democracy not in monarchies any more. Democracy and secularism will soon become universal values like truth and honesty.

[faye]

malaysia and morocco still have monarchies but seem to be doing well.

[ScimitarXEdge]

Let's get one thing straight; with no rhetorical pretentiousness to hide behind.

Secular Democracy doesn't exist, it never has; in fact the term itself is a total oxymoron. What we see prominent in the world today is Secular Oligarchy, which is more or less just a revamped version of European feudal societies.Shallow displays of electoral caucuses are only for the gullible. The power structure is defined by those who have created institutions grants them monopoly and hegemony on the channel of resources by which society and the political system operates; and thus the society of secular oligarchies rely essentially on material pacification. It's from that status quo, which they establish a great deal of simply dysfunctional operations which interfere/inihibit/distort/rob the intrinsic dispositions of the people; essentially it's the most ratified form of social subjugation, keeping society pacified, almost as sheep, as cliched as that sounds. The total opposite of a democracy. The reason it's secular is centered on man-made authority. Democracy and Secularism is a contradiction. Even then Democracy is a very abstract concept; all it means if the people become the central governing power and if People are Muslims, Islam becomes the central governing power, So Islam would be a much better model embodying democracy as opposed to secularism because it's the related to the Nature of the People.

Egypt's rulership was a Secular Oligarchy, but of a a more rudimentary variation, not the sophisticated form of fluid electoral orchestrations while actual power structure rests in the hands of Materially exploitive elements; that is what goes on in Western Europe and North America and of course a few other miscellaneous places. The uprising in Egypt overthrow Secular Oligarchy for democracy. In that the peoples own values played the stage and not the values of a foreign imposed imperial agenda. which proves the Islamic movement is democratic resistance against secularism.

As others pointed out The Muslim brotherhood are homegrown from Egypt; so by definition that can't be imperialistic; they're apart of the society. For the sake of argument, even if they weren't native to Egypt or grassroots in Egypt, they still could not be imperialist; because they're a transnatonal entity and not a national one; which nullifies Imperialism.

In regards to Muslims had no problem "getting support" from Secular Oligarchies; the support was covert, hence your average Muslim had no idea what was going on; They just assumed money was coming from Saudi. Can't really blame people for what happens clandestinely.

[khushal]

I also want to make something clear. The afghans never begged the Americans or the Arabs for help, but it was the other way around. It was this man, one of americas brightest people, that begged the Afghans to fight, for if the afghans did not fight, they would have been trembling with fear. Remember Soviet Socialism was advancing all over the world, it was the afghans that turned the tide around. Now listen to his begging.

YouTube - God is on your side!

[roadrunner]

Well, I didnt see the Muslim world complain when they got funding and supprot from these secular democracies when they declared Jihad on the Soviet Union.

Obviously, having the Muslim brotherhood in power is not beneficial to anybody except those who promote Pan-Islamist Ideals.

If Muslim brotherhood got into power, Christians and Non Muslims would be persecuted. I think its reasonable of the "International Community" to prevent such a overthrowing, but the support from the secular world has been outstanding in the recent uprisings in the Arab world.

I personally feel, Saudi Arabia needs to be overthrown and replaced with a democratic government,abolishment of Sharia laws and freedom for all.

Same I would say about the Vatican. We all live as one, one law for all and for all mankind.

Noone needs to be overthrown. Just give them democracy. Let them elect who they like. The government will probably reflect the people. That is what it's meant to do. Serve the people.

[roadrunner]

This is very strange that in the whole Arab world we dont have a single democracy. All are monarchies and dictatorships. In the Muslim world we have only true democracy in Turkey, Malaysia and few others. Pakistan is becoming a better democracy while Afghanistan is also on the right track now.

Arab world cant resist the wave of democracy which made the Europe of dark ages into the developed world. Humanity got its freedom and human rights and rule of law are supreme. How Arab world in this modern era can be immune to this trend!

Very soon we will have democracies and secularism will prevail in the real sense of the word.

West should no more support the dictators in their larger self interest as now even in the Arab world the national interest for the developed world is in democracy not in monarchies any more. Democracy and secularism will soon become universal values like truth and honesty.

Democracy isn't always such a great thing. You've been watching too much Hollywood.

[faye]

that was funny roadrunner, you just said, 'give them democracy' and in the next breath said 'democracy isn't always such a great thing'. but you are right it depends who is voted in. they are often deceptive so that, what they say before being voted in and what they do, once they are in, don't always match.

[roadrunner]

that was funny roadrunner, you just said, 'give them democracy' and in the next breath said 'democracy isn't always such a great thing'. but you are right it depends who is voted in. they are often deceptive so that, what they say before being voted in and what they do, once they are in, don't always match.

Its not always the best solution.

But it does reflect the population. So give it them. If they're bad people, they're screwed.

[faye]

it doesn't necessarily reflect the population if the person is a good deciever and there are the manipulations occurring from the wealthy. we have that in australia, at the moment, where the prime minister wanted to up the tax of mining and the billionaire mining magnates did big newspaper and tv publicity campaigns and threatened to have to reign in their investing if the tax went up. blackmail and propaganda won the day.

[roadrunner]

naive populations are reflected in their choice of leader

[faye]

whatever you say, roadrunner.

[roadrunner]

do you disagree?

[khushal]

naive populations are reflected in their choice of leader

This would be true if there was such a thing as true democracy, but it does not exist. I dont know where you live roadrunner, but in America, the electoral college votes for the president, not the people. Its like Scimitar said, the ones in power don't represent the people's interests, but they represent the corporations interests. If you do not represent corporate interests, it would be extremely difficult or nearly impossible to get voted in.
We have the democrats and republicans and thats it. There has been attempts to create an alternative but to no success because the corporations would not let them in unless the corporations interests are represented.
Believe it or not but most third world countries are owned by corporations. These corporations have a higher revenue than most of those country's GDP that they own. If some of the rulers of those third world countries become "disobliging" then they will be dealt with either a coup or an invasion by the corporate owned NATO military. Example; Noriega of Panama who became "disobliging" in 1989, Saddam of Iraq who became "disobliging" in 1990, and many others.
These institutions were inherited from the Brits when British companies basically owned 80% of the world and the most prized British corporation was the infamous east India company.