1794. he will be graced by neely statue to a fur seller. this is -- a revoltthe only statue to a fur seller. this is -- a revolt against the occupying power. what is happening in egypt is not crisis. it is revolution. it is fascinating the media are happy to talk about the revolution in tunisia but al-jazeera and everybody else, increases in egypt. why do emphasize the difference? mubarak's revelers -- resignation will end the crisis but up revolution. crisis is the word of choice in the forces of the order to the clintons of the world because cosmetic change can end a brief crisis but the revolution. i say as a historian my future

quality will call this a revolution in we should too. another remarkable difference is today's revolution is above vote work of a specific group. we should call them the liberation generation. in honor of those who have fallen. it is judged not on immediate results but on long-term structural changes which is what set them apart. in 1848 in europe, the short one that is true. the main goals, it came to pass almost everywhere and goes back to the middle ages. in 1381 they fought against serfdom, abolished serfdom, reestablished serfdom, the revolt is crushed bird we but

serfdom disappears in tyler's region within 25 years. the same happened in germany when 87 peasants were massacred in reprises for revolt against serfdom and then serfdom had disappeared. you see other examples in the nineteenth century. deliberation generation in middle age in 2013 and 2014 will remember what they fought for. egypt in 200030 will be a more democratic society. what is less certain is they will be democratic and coming years. the thousands of older demonstrators want to see that happen. the state will move heaven and earth to prevent that happening. state and republic used interchangeably but profoundly different. the last four centuries, everywhere in the western world due to imperialism to convince

the rules that republicans state are one and the same thing. tunisian said the egyptians have risen up to denounce this fraud for what it is. the supreme interest is in the collective good of its campaigns and other inhabitants which can be achieved over the long run all the by reason according to reason and justice. the republic appears to be chaos to represent the deeper order. justice achieved for reason but the principle around which it is organized. philosophically the state appears to be order but is ordered chaos. the state has no principle beyond its own persistence. practically the state matters a great deal. it must carry out an extraordinary balancing act. as a servant of the republicans must provide the ordered necessary for the republic and

its civil society to function. seeking to serve it must never be the master. that is the problem in these states. states always use the same technique to attack the republican, fear. we see plenty of that in the united states. the conundrum facing citizens is how to create a state powerful enough to protect the republic but we cannot destroy it. the constant use of the term failed state ignores the fact that such places as somalia or afghanistan have political system is, no.republic. no group of citizens committed to the rule of law, reason and justice. without a republican only a state to build on group force can survive. even such states as sensibly moral justification for their exercise of power. states all over the world rely on brute force to survive. the greatest possible difficulty evolving into republics as we see in egypt today where we have

a state involved, republic based states like the u.s. often conduct international relations on the basis of state interaction. primacy to violent means to end guaranteed by force we will soon see how a federal ends guaranteed by force can rock in afghanistan but as there was a piece in the new york times that without dealing in the same terms talking about this conundrum in american foreign policy with respect to supporting dictators, one of our national sports. we cannot ignore the state to state dimension of international relations but an exclusive focus on that creates warped values system that leads the u.s. and france to support dictators like hosni mubarak. in egypt we hear stories from remarks in favor of, quote, democracy for american officials but a cynical policy of dumping mubarak and keep it mubarak --

what could be warm person than the revelation that the u.s. special envoy to egypt works for the law firm patton box which, quote, adviseds the egyptian military and economic development agency and handle arbitration and litigation on the note that the europe and you as -- for the u.s. ambassador in the role of todo many of you're familiar with pools back the curtain and the immediate denial convinced as few people as a wizard's plaintive pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. the u.s. did not recall with nehr in response to the revelation of the conflict of interest but only in light of his embarrassing revelation which was of course -- in understanding policy and public discussion we have to go beyond that. egypt pays a million dollars a

year to its lobbyists in d.c. led by the brother of president clinton's chief of staff and two former congressman from each party, one of them was former head of the house appropriations committee. he knows where the money is. p l m has represented egypt since 2007. my guess include boeing and lockheed martin. they're paid for by a u.s.aid to egypt. hillary clinton's economic ignorance -- if you turn on your television, to pbs's news hour on the twenty-seventh of january to get analysis of the egyptian events listened to grant beaten, the middle east institute. he said some stupid things. i wonder who is this guy? they did not tell viewers that

in 2007 he was himself egypt's chief official of deaver -- lobbyists from washington d.c.. would he offer his analysis? the way you make change is hosni mubarak is strong and given the changes let me ask you to keep that in mind, the key word is. al-jazeera's empire, rasheed, leeds stated getting rid of mubarak is meaningless. the tunisian case where came members of the apparatus where police chiefs and interior ministers have in fact been fired. i would disagree. it is not a done deal. the ring of legal scholar, longtime advocate of human rights, he tipped as in to need a we see the case of a state that denied the existence of a civic society. i contrast civic and civil.

civic society is a fear of politics. ministates have civil citizenship. protection from property but not necessarily civic. they define the state order as the highest goal of society. citizens in egypt and -- they go to the highest goal of republic which is collective interests of citizens. as is invariably the case in states that muzzled public debate for years on end egypt and tunisia lacked the public's fear where they air differences where politics built on reason and justice. only revolution in the streets could break through and start the civic process. one danger of a publishing civic life is opposition to the state would shift for a non political dimension of legitimacy so religion offers the ideal method weather is louis xv could follow the system, and lou fresen in

east germany, islam in iran or sunni islam in mubarak egypt. why we focus on one of those opposed to the other without thinking of the broader pattern is very revealing. the state will stop at nothing, no law is too evil. a job talk by kate brown in university of maryland baltimore kelly offers a chilling modern example of her talk in the soviet and american nuclear states and their common reactions to the problem of plutonium support. ben ali's regime about foreign terrorists and criminals being behind demonstrations when i was in demonstrations in the 60s and 70s. we were outside agitators. caned abdallah said as much about those in egypt. such accusations so conclusively that these tyrants do not understand the new world of communication with accusations of foreign terrorists can be

discredited by those attending demonstrations. hosting movies on facebook or whatever. everyone can see the demonstrators across the street are foreign terrorists. modern dictatorial regimes have no quicker means of discrediting themselves than the old lies which are hard wired into their dna. as for evil deeds what could be worse than deliberate use of armed criminals and the police to loot and pillage and solve these demonstrators? prime minister david cameron said government sponsorship of such activities is, quote, despicable. those of us familiar with european history have seen district many times. you cause disruption in the streets and claim you will bring order. hitler used that trick in the early 30s. close all kinds of disruptions. i will bring peace. he called off the folks that it was civil war. hitler kept alive his promises. pretty scary.

mubarak, quote, fears chaos yet he is the one causing it. that is another old trick described by george orwell in 1984. karl rove was a master of this in u.s. politics so the accurate charges against you look like rhetorical reprisal. stalin was a master of this. let me steal a phrase from boston harbor about peaceful revolution. linguistically ben ali was acting president of tunisia. king abdallah was the henchman reminding this french historian of louis xvi. in 1789 ben holly seemed to sense the need to allow some public spirit to exist but turned out to be his last speech that betrayed his fundamental misunderstanding of the new reality, quote, and i decided freedom for the media with its channels and cadets sites with any form of monitoring. the critical phrase was the death toll of his tunisian.

the acting president is no better unconsciously revealed that his acceptance speech is the same attitude. first and foremost, quote, in the state's supreme interest, and national unity. toomey sean hannity forces allied the fight for the supreme interest of the states against those lead by someone who stands for the republic. they hope his commission will be that frankfurt assembly of our day. was a group of german intellectuals and university professors who gathered together in 1848 to create a unified german state with a democratic constitution. 18 months later after fighting about where the comma should know they were sent home. discredit academics in politics for 100 years. they just can't help themselves.

it is the only way ben ali can phrase a decision about this. louis xvi believe, quote, i want it so it is legal. hosni mubarak thinks he can give reform to the egyptian people. he thinks he can make their naughty children go home and be himself which is far more troubling that the western powers led by the u.s. seem ready to betray our tradition by accepting the principle that a dictator can't give rights to any one. states do not give rights. legitimate states recognize our, quote, inalienable rights as a well-known document put it. demonstrators cannot associate about creating a democratic political system with someone like suleyman because he is incapable of thinking of such terms. the patriarchal figure whether it is the father of the family or the nation, gives the rules.

tunisian that the egyptians, the state must focus -- nest not for a -- focus on its strength but weakness. they don't want to destroy the strait so necessary to the functioning of the republic but make it the republican servant. not its master. removing criminals from the apex of state power will not change the fundamental relationship of state and citizens and only a legitimate political process replaces authority backward and permanent change. it cannot stop with ben callie and mubarak. . so long as he did as security police apparatus and heavily armed praetorian presidential guard no free and fair elections are possible. it will not be easy because egypt's institutions of physical life have been systematically

destroyed. the liberation generation must learn from past generations the problem is not one man and his allies but a political system that the fines the state's supreme interests with a republic. [applause] >> thank you. our next speaker is professor s hseem addad of george mason university. >> i am actually studying up. [laughter] i would like to be a bit brief because i have to go to the

bathroom. my talk is going to be a little disappointing because it is are really about revolution and i think some of us -- all of us who have been glued to the tv and printing press have gotten a good deal of analysis on the basics so i will actually be addressing reform and how it got us where we are today. reform and social polarization in egypt. we have been witnessing a magnificent set of development that many of us did not see coming. my recent work on the economy of egypt and its growing social unrest has focused on issues we are seeing today on the streets. these are out of various reforms we are addressing but i never thought it would have this much

so quickly. the topic of social polarizations to the center of what is happening today. analysts rush to dismiss economic factors as though they are assuming they are single-handedly producing the outcome which is important, crucial factor. news on the egyptian uprising, it would be good to take part of the center history that eliminates the reform, and mass mobilization. it would be relevant to other countries in the region and beyond. we would not hear about revolution. it is replicated in many other

countries but some of those arab regimes undergoing reforms. the caveat i want to start with is social polarization -- i want to stress produced in the uprising. not one element under which we cannot understand the magnitude of what is happening. we focus on matters on the circuit and we will think back underneath, it is quite boring. with structural adjustment, with the adjustment program. and remove the implementation or impediment to future growth. and privatization with budget

deficits and infusion of foreign investment capital. these were intended to improve economic health, with that was upon society. with unemployment and economic power, reducing the state's role in managing the economy prioritizing state-owned assets and attracting foreign investments. reforms also succeeded in creating greater social polarization between rich and poor. and deteriorated living standards and resulted in uneven geographical and historical development throughout the country that exacerbated the negative side effect of reform. we are witnessing is not centrally in cairo or

metropolitan cities. is happening in the countryside. there is a debate regarding what caused the failure. is it the policies themselves or obstacles to implementation to the nature in egypt? the question of these leading the same obstacles that any review of the playing field would have made clear. evidence from research of economists and practitioners including virginia wire connecting to the world bank and former vice president of the world banks suggests outcomes related to inequity and social polarization are not explained by policy implementation. the authoritarian nature of the regime or the elite capture of these policies. we must go back to the drawing board to emphasize trickle-down

economics over and against various forms of developments. with a few years after 91 egypt managed to reduce its budget deficit with control of the economic imbalances. with innovative techniques and fundamentally altering the social statements of society. prior to the 1990s egypt took responsibility for sources to the people including welfare service deployment, health and education and income support with subsidies. returned to the population was acquiescent to the regime. this did not happen across the board. unemployment and poverty were abundant. these were mitigated by the existence of state support apparatus provided a broad safety net that prevented many from falling into the depths of

edge up to -- abject poverty. improving economic conditions stripped away the safety net by weakening sulfur is -- welfare programs and bringing back consumer subsidies, eliminating employment guarantees. and and and large private sector employment to lower wages and benefits and higher unemployment. reform to the policy are also very important because they affect t