realist you that it tends to dominate -- view tends to dominate in world affairs. it is a very big mistake. in dealing with the muslim brotherhood, you're not just talking about a set of practical interest. y're dealing with a group that has -- that formed on the basis ideology and liv to serve that ideology, as practical, flexible, and nimble as they have shown themselves to be in many respects, i think it would be a serious mistake to ignore the essential, ideological nature of the organization, and to just assume that they are -- that they can easily become responsible political actors in a democratic egypt. w, the reason there is so much

focus on the muslim brotherhood is that they are o of the two institutions that are, right now, maneuvering for influence and power in whenever the next stage of egyptn political development is going to be -- whatever the next stage of the egyptian political development is going to be. america's job is to do whatever it can to help manage or influence the political transition in egypt. but, it is important to observe that, in all events, our influence is limited in this kind of affair. it is especially limid, given that we enter into all this turmoil as the united states government without a strategy. i think the fact that we did not, over the last two years,

have an adminiration that was reaching out to multiple players in egypt and cultivating people and institutions and ideas that ould have helped us with better information better intelligence, better contacts, more influence -- it has put this in a position where the united states government now is largely a bystander rather than a significant player in developments in egypt. but, in any event, we should be trying, within our limited means, to exercise some influence and that influence, if we have a truly strategic view that takes into account these considerations about promoting liberal-democratic institutions and recognizing with the muslim brotherhood is -- whatever influence we have should be directed towards minimizing the

kind of political power that the muslim brotherhood would like to establish for itself in egypt. and i would just say that, overall, my message is a message of trying to approach this problem with balance and to recognize that what the administration has been doing in recent days has been crisis management, rather than the implementation of a strate. it would be helpfulf they have a strategy. it makes the crisis management, in many ways, easie and more likely to advance the u.s. national interests. thank you. [applause] >> thank you.

i think our panelists did an excellent job ofliminating -- eliminating some of the issues that our policy makers are thinking about -- illuminating some of the issues that are policymakers are thinking about and talking about today. i would ask that you identify yourself and your organization and wait for the microphone, since we're taping this for our we site -- website, www.hudson.org. over on this side. >> thank you. i would like to direct this question to douglas feith and whoever else might have some insight into it. i am indira lakshmanan, the diplomatic reporter for lumber news. i want to know what you think about -- for bloomberg news.

i want to know what to think about the funding that has been cut in recent years. why did they do this and do you think this has had an effect on disempowering ngos? >> i think that the cutting of funds by the obama administration for democracy promotion was one aspect of what i referred to in my talk as they're turning away or running away from the bush freedom agenda. interestin point, i think, to realize that the general promotional liberal- democratic ideas and institutions has been a part of american national security policy from democratic and republican administrations for

decades. president bush made it a particularly, highly-eliminated part of his -- highly- illuminated part of his policy, but it was not a radical departure from american foreign policy what was much more of a radical departure from traditional american foreign policy was what the obama administration did when it came in in cutting democracy-promotio funds and basically showing a lack of interest -- an affirmative lack of interest in democracy in russia or human rights and democratic considerations in russia, in china, in egypt, in saudi arabia, syria, and various other places where it had been an important part of the

american agenda. the obama administration, and then, of course, in president obama's cairo speech, he talked about democracy there, but he gave it so clearly a minor emphasis that it was in real contrast to what had been done by the previous administration. and i think it was largely an effort for obama to position himself as the un-bush. i think it was a very serious mistake. i do think it did harm, as your question suggests, it did harm our ties to various groups and our ability, basically, to have better information and better contacts in egypt during this proces -- crisis. >> ok. the gentleman right here. >> [unintligible]

my question is for doug feith. how come the obama administration did not know about this? [unintelligible] do you think obama will use this egyptian crisis to ask israel to give more concessions? [unintelgible] this is not the first time [unintelligible] punjab is a very important province in pakistan. [inaudible]

-- [unintelligible] somehow, these people are inherently less cultural. i mean, [unintelligible] my question is how obama will use this crisis as leverage against israel because it was very difficult to g concessions to palestinians. now, obama is in a very strong position to do that. >> i think one of the noteworthy features about the political upheaval in egypt is how little it has to do with israel. i do not think that israel is a gigantic factor here. your point about intelligence --

very often, our intelligence can produce some insight about particular facts. but the kind of -- the kind of question about which the administration was surprised, which is that this authoritarian regime in egypt was going to have a major -- was going to create major instability when the time came for dealing with some kind of political transition -- you did not have to be in intelligence to see that coming. i mean, anybody -- that's not -- that's a matter of intelligence, but it's the intelligence of ordinary people we are talking about. it's not the intelligence of intelligence agencies. there was a lack of intelligence in the sense that they failed to see something that should have been obvious to everybody.

i say "failed to see," perhaps in parts of their brains, the leaders of the u.s. government saw this. but it was not at the fore of their minds and thewere not dealing with it as something that could happen imminently. that is partly the reason they look so shocked when thevents occurred. the other point i would make is that, again, since i'm trying to show how important it is to balance interests here -- when people say that some countries or some people are not ready for democracy, sometimes, that is true. and i think we have seen examples of it where people have democratic opportunities and they blow them. and you get an example like the

elections in the gaza strip that produced this extreme the anti- democratic result of putting hamas in power. but, just as a countervailing thought, if you had said to a serious student of germany, let's say, in 1946, that, in 60 germany was years germans, going to be a solid, liberal democracy whose basic attitude toward international of years was -- intnational affairs was pacifist, they would have said, you do not know anything about chairman history -- german history or culture. it is not going to happe

all of the sensible people would have said that democracy of that kind in germany was inconceivable. likewise japan. as important -- and i do think valid -- as all the warnings and cautions we have heard from the panel are this morning about the difficulties of moving a society like egypt in the direction of liberal democracy -- as important as that is, i do not think we should be completely closed minded to the idea that -- close-minded to t idea that countries sometimes manage to pull off philosophical see changes that are very beneficial to the people of the country and the world. it is in america's interest to promote those ideas, even when they are long shots. in some cases, they pay off, as

in the cases of germany and japan. i mean, they pay off informally for those countries, for the world, and for u.s. interests -- they pay off enormously for those countries, for the world, and for u.s. interests. >> produced the into the microphone -- could you speak into the microphone? >> my question goes to mr. feith and anyone else on the panel. under the current turmoil, do you think the u.s. has aath or way to preserve the peace treaty b? by buyin time for the election, do you think the u.s. knows who to speak to to stop the current tide of the muslim brotherhood and their rise to power?

>> as i said before, i do not think we knoas much as we should know. i think the u.s. government would benefit enoously if the government of the time to hear the presentations that sam tadros, and paul marshall, and lee smith made this morning about the political scene there. >> i think when sam describing for -- described before -- i agree that one of the interesting things about the protests is that we realize that the arab-israeli crisis is not the key issue. there are lots of other issues as well. however, if we also look at these demonstrations, i think that one of the things that we see is that people are dissatisfied. people are unhappy with the peace treaty. we are talking about giving people a free voice in the governance of their own society.

one of the things we're going to find out is that, for better or worse, people do not like this peace treaty with israel. i find it very unfortunate, but i think it is the case. as we look around the region, that is the way it is. we can blame the regime force during this up -- for stirring this up, and they do a perfectly good job of this, but it is also a popar feeling on the street. one of the things we probably need to come to terms with pretty soon ishat a peace treaty may be on shaky ground. i do not think with the military regime. we also need to understand this is what the military plans for. that is the enemy, not libya, not saddam, not the iranians -- israel -- that is the enemy, not libya, n sudan, no the

iranians. israel. we're talking about tens of millions of young people who do not remember the catastrophe that 67 or 73 brought egypt. >> a question right here. >> my name is ron, a retired international development consultant. while i appreciate the need for a maturity or maturation process for civil society so that the institutions of democracy are strong, it seems that there will be an election in september. the scenario there, according to what you have said and what we read, is that the muslim brotherhood is likely to be in power. if that is the case, the u.s., if they follow what they did in gaza to not recognize hamas,

will not recognize the muslim brotherhood, which will cross the street to erupt again -- cause the street to erupt again. we will be in worse trouble. i would like to hear your predictions. what will be the result of the elections in the fall, or do you suspect there will not be? >> i think there will definitely be elections in the fall. how those elections -- of course, we're speaking about presidential elections and not parliamentary. the egyptian government has so far refused to dissolve the egyptian parliament arguing that, to pass those constitutional amendments, you have to have that current parliament. presidential elections will take place. i would doubt that the muslim brotherhood would be able to challenge the military in the presidential elections.

the egyptian military is immensely popular. the reasons are various points -- the popularity of the victory with israel in 1973, the army is viewed as clean. we do not hear about corruption cases. the army is viewed as efficient. if the army puts a young face, perhaps the prime minister been the interesting candidate here -- of course, when i say young fa, that is relative. he is 69, i believe. [laughter] layman --an omar's a omar suleiman, the vice president. i think, in that case, he would be able to win the presidential election. the more important question will deal with the parliamentary elections. i think the pressure will be on

the regime immediately after the presidential ections to dissolve parliament and call for new elections, since everyone knows what a disgrace of and elections the last one was -- of an election the last one w. in that case, aictory by the muslim brotherhood is an issue to be concerned with. of course, there are many issues to deal with here. we're not talking about winning egypt as a whole. what would happen in each district? who are the candidates? there are so many different issues to deal with. the concern would be with the parliamentary elections, not the presidential elections where the muslim brotherhood would be unlikely to have a serious candidate to challenge a young, clean face from theilitary. >> i would like to pose a

question to our panelists. the united states has been giving either to $1.5 billion to $2 billion in aid annually to egypt. is that leverage we can now use, now that mubarak will be out of the way, to bring in some of these democratic bodies and initutions that doug talked about? if so, what would you call priorities -- and achievable priorities in the near term? sam, do you want to start with that? >> i think one of the interesting surprises in the last few days is how little information we have about the egyptian military. i have spoken to various people in the admintration -- previous administration. the sense is that mubarak had always kept a wall of separation

between the egyptian military and its american contacts. any attempt to deal with the military through open-channel dialogue with the military leadership was always stopped by mubarak. so, whether the military contact, the aid it reflects any real relationship with the people or not is a question mark. whether it can be used -- definitely. i think everybody has been talking about the aid to egypt in the form of -- about cutting the aid to get the results you want. i think it might be worthwhile to think for a while about whether the aid can be used as a tax, whetherore aid might

encourage the military to bring reforms. what those records would be -- i would say that it is more important than opening up the system is allowing the ideas that we've understand as liberal and democratic to be inside the system. the egyptian government has always managed to portray their problem, and rightly so, of choosing between the regime and islamists. how can you create certainty and allow this alternative to grow -- a bringing those ideas inside egyptian society, allowing real civil society to grow. i think those are the areas where the militarwould be prescient to bring those tngs. >> paul, would you like to say something? he painted a very dire picture based on the comments of the christian leaders. this is the largest religious minority in the middle east --

the coptic christians in egypt. if they have drawn comparisons with iraq, which is certainly a chilling thing, as half the christians there have left since 2004. if there is a mass exodus of 10 million people, it will be bad for u.s. interests. what do you see that the united states should be thinking about doing at this point? >> in terms of other countries i mentioned -- again, they are going to be different from egypt. just to emphasize my basic point -- all o the examples are horrible regimes, so we should not expect anything difrent in egypt. in terms of dealing with religious minorities in egypt, i believe that one of the things the u.s. should push is for

religious freedom. this is important because it is a major part of equality before the law. it is one thing that they have pushed for -- the uniform code forbidding places of worship -- for building places of worship. other features of the demands -- rights are based upon citizenship, rather than religion. these are not so much in protections for particular group, but universalizing the law and having citizenship law i wou make this part of the agenda of the use of u.s. aid. we mentioned cutting back on the democratation programs. i think one thing that the u.s. could certainly use its military

aid to leverage is the ability to offer more aid, which goes toward the question of civil society. that includes religious freedom and her forms of human rights. the growth of independent journalism, of a free press, things of this kind. this week can do -- it would help egyptians and also provide the foundation for the growth of alternative political parties and voices. i would use our aid to leverage more aid and make religious freedom part of that. >> thank you. i think we're out of time. i would ask you all to join me in the thanking our presenters today. [applause] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011]

>> in awe few moments, georgetown hosts a conversation n. less than two hours, a tea party meeting with members of congress. after that, we'll rehair the forum on the u.s. response to political unrest in egypt.

>> the new class of freshman senators have been giving speeches on the senate floor, follow their appearances online. track the daily lines and read transcripts of every session and find a full video archive of every member. >> next a forum on political unrest in egypt and the arab world from the georgetown university school of foreign service. this is less than two hours.

the lecture series and tonight's event are both spurred by recent events first in tunisia, and desire on our part to put together public debate on the subjects, the events unfolding and not be merely reacting to

current events, but trying to situate this in longer term context, history, cultures, positions, actors and so on and to try to tease this out in as many ways as we can and not thinking of it solely as a set of events that could be understood by solely one academic discipline. tonight we have four speakers. our first speaker will be a speaker from georgetown university with a focus on north africa. our second speaker is james collins, who teaches french history, also here at georgetown university. our third speaker will be director of the middle east studies program and professor in the department of public and international affairs at george

mason university. he is also a visiting professor here at georgetown university. and finally, myself, elliott cola, i teach arabic at georgetown university. i will be the last speaker. please, professor.

the protests, historically and comprehend them in theoretical. our exchanges were somewhat complicated by the pace and the magnitude of the events and it is beyond question the recent developments in tunisia implications for the political landscape of the region as a whole and by extension foreign relations with the world at large. from the perspective of historians of africa, the repeated consensus that the region is now fundamentally transformed is more a thesis than it is a verdict. and the thesis in question is whether the theoretical frameworks with which historians analyzed social movement in the region are able to interpret and explain the recent developments in meaningful ways. there is nothing academic in the

academic training of historians that would give them the superior tools or the confidence to interpret events on the quick n. fact, historians are notably reluctant to leap into the fray without caveat. they are also inept at producing any grandry. however, because historians are not bound by or to philosophy, they are happy to borrow from many scientific disciplines and deploy conceptual framework that render meaningful in both structural and verbal terms, the pattern of human behavior and historical change. this kind of cross-examination, prove particularly desirable and useful in the case of the recent protests in the arab world. because these demonstrations are dictating paradigm shifts of both political and conceptual dimensions. like the iranian revolution of

1979, the protests of 2010-2011 are seismic in they are sweeping away political regimes and a particular world view, as well. t tunisia has shattered ideas about arab societys and challenging basic historical conventions on on how revolutions will play out. as a result, it follows that we may need to reevaluate notions on the social movements and political action in the region. now at first glance, the protests are proving that the conventional wisdom on the middle east and north africa is out of step with developments in the region, especially at the level offide logical pluralism, popular culture and mass media, or social media. the larger problem is that the field of middle east and north african studies remains mired in

modernization series and association with contentuous interest. in addition, when it comes to the specific chapter on popular action in arab muslim society, historical understanding is still conditioned by the standoff between two philosophical and method logical. on one side we have proponents of the sos logical history of max vaber and thereom of and to put things schematically, it is reflection of commitment to a particular belief system and studies inspired by the school focused narrow mindedly on the ways in which elites make use of ideology to gain political legitimacy. in the context of north africa and especially since the iranian revolution of 1979, this school of thought has regarded the

system and history of collective movement becomes an account of the role of islam in political action. now this view has 94ished the narrative of the arab regimes themselves and of the conservative elements in western and israeli academia. the arab security aprattis is the last work against islamic mold. if anything, the recent events in tunisia and egypt should is expose the limitation of this viewpoint. one sentence -- on the part of some analysts and commentators other than islam may provide social and political cohesion for a mass protest movement in the arab world. this comes across in the haste

with which scholars have rushed to describe the tunisian as post-islamist. it comes across in how western media channels have reported on the deployment of religious symbols by some of the protesters. in the lands of the western media and this is especially true in the early going, it seems to me as i was watching the news that the moment an egyptian demonstrator kneels to pray, something significant happened in the way the events were reported. this egyptian demonstrator suddenly ceased to be a worker or a student or a trade unionist or a human rights activist and by automatic reflex returned to the category he or she was returned to the category of muslim who, by definition, was mobilized primarily by appeals to his or her religion. it bears noting that this perception was among the first

to be revised as the protests wore on and their pluralistic profile came to the floor. one sense is something will take place at the level of scholarship. now the second school is composed of neal marxis neal marxist historians, with beliefs derive friday social interest and movement is the result of shifts. now here too is interpretation that doesn't apply seamlessly to the tunisian or egyptian context, especially when you take into account the demonstrators have not justified their political actions by invoking the classic themes, symbols and arguments of class struggle. the egyptian and tunisian protest may be revolt of the poor, but the demands of demonstrators cannot be neatly

categorized intoide logical or notions of justice. at least that is not very obvious to me. what seems to be absent in this perspective is understanding of the histore cal processs that have contributed or congealed the experiences of tunisians and egyptians from all walks of life into one cohesive yet largely leader areless movement. due to our near obsession with the islam dichotomy, we have not paid enough attention to the remarkable pluralism that has developed at the level of local politics and popular culture in arab societies, at least over the last two decades, if not longer. for the last two weekss as sooif speculated how scholarship may respond to the recent developments, i found myself

turning to a european historian whose corrective notion of social class and ideology may suggest promising new perspectives for studies in africa. this wouldn't be the first time that historians of the region have referenced the similar writings of thompson and the making of the english working class and moral economy in the 18th century. now that the time is especially right to revisit this central notion as they may pertain to arab societies. what i have in mind specifically is thompson's redefinition of social class as a set of relations, rather than structures. i think this is one way we may understand how unified political actions are able to be reconciled with broad and transregional sos logical or cultural interests.

another notion in his writing is idea of the moral economy. now he uses this theme to show how the writers in the 18th centuries were impelled by a socially and culturally grounded sense of justice. i think this is one notion that may help middle east and north africa, also it may shed light on the -- what is guiding the political actions of the pro-democracy demonstrators today and how this idea of moral economy may be shaping the rituals of protest we've been witnessing and providing with symbols they have been using. in other words, what i'm trying to say is that thompson's study of how social relations and cultural values coalesce into a moral economy of important things to say about the dual dimensions of the tunisian and

egyptian movements, vertically as a lens for which to analyze mobilization across white segments of society and horizontally to comprehend why and how the tunisian riots have conspired similar move thament res nated with local relevance from morocco to the gulf. we have heard the common slogans from morocco to jordan, we have seen the flags among the demonstrators and we have witnessed the tragic recurrence of self emulation. what are political and cultural historians to make of these commonalities, other than maybe that they must be connected to some transregional economy that emerges from a shared and lived experience. now there is another dimension to the idea of moral economy that may be interesting to investigate further and it is that it may help us trace the

impact of new technologies of mass media in shaping a shared popular culture and shaping a platform for political mobilization. as one journalist recently noted, where activists were once defined by causes, they are now defined by their tools and i think this is something that we in north africa need to start taking more seriously. it is obvious that electronic devices and innovation in wireless communication, satellite television and independent and social media may cultivate and sustain moral economy with which to knit together larger coalition for political purpose. and then to connect them to national, regional and global developments. in this sense, the micropolitics of protests can translate very quickly into a heightened awareness of political possibilities and of local gains to be made from extra local

developments. i think this is obviously the case of egypt and the inspiration it's been getting from the tunisian press. finally, changing relations between government and society can determine the patterns of protests and at minimum the events of tunisia and egypt should prompt us to reevaluate as it applies to arab regimes. this is an established relationship that is paradigm in our studies, the arab governments. but it is clear enough that the established relationship between arab political authority and popular will has been largely shake sxen regimes are being forced to reconsider the ways in which they enforce legitimacy. if the regimes survive as seems to be the case in egypt for now, their immediate move will surely be to rethink the control over the state's institutional and symbolic repressive apprat uses.

regimes may react to the transnational and virtual networks at the heart of the new moral economy. some in this room may remember the 1970s song "the revolution will not be televised," and this is a song that had control over the media and ability to marginalize the sense. as a means to measure how much times have changed since 19secht, let's consider revised slogan like the revolution will not be tweeted, instead and speculate on some of the virtual wars we have witnessed in egypt frshgs attempts by the authorities to shut down the internet to counter-attempts by anonymous hackers to triple the mainframe computers. today it seems it makes just as

much sense to leave government buildings behind and stage protests against firms that sell internet and wireless tracking technologies to regimes. this is a new dimension in the way we're trying to understand government mentality and how forms of power are deployed throughout society. basically as students of the middle east and north africa, we've known for sometime that the common thread of corrupt ruthless regimes has translated into regional social and political fault line. and what remains to be seen today and where i hope that we can start a debate today is to consider the reasons why or why not the moral outrage of the tunisian and egyptian people will remain -- along this once

dormant -- and i think i will stop here and thank you for your attention. [ cheers and applause ] >> our next speaker is professor james collins from the history department at georgetown university. >> it has been fun to watch the revolution being televised, i have to say. i was telling osama the other morning, i was watching with my grandson, who is 10, and -- it

was dinner on monday last week and he, we obviously had been watching a lot and he said to me, why are the people in egypt demonstrating? i said, they want to get rid of the president. and he said, well, why do they want to get rid of the president? and i said, because they think he's been there too long. he said, how long has he been there? i said, 30 years. he said, that's too long. and went back to eating dinner and never said another word. i thought, that's pretty good analysis of the situation. now i'm not a specialist on egypt or the middle east, although i have been to egypt once. and i'm going to focus on two issues, the conflict between state and republic and on language. and i'm going to start not in

cairo, but in another revolutionary city, warsaw, which has my favorite statue, a shoemaker. a statue of a shoemaker, the only one i know. he led the warsaw uprising as russians in 1794 and after poland became a country after world war i, they put up a statue right in front of what had been the russian governor's residence in warsaw. i wonder why. some say justice will be graced by the world's only statue to a --. he led one part of a revolt against occupying, who heroic gesture inspired revolution. i'm going to focus on language, let me stop to emphasize the word "revolution," which is not crisis tis revolution. i find it fascinating the media are happy to talk about the jasmine revolution in tunisia,

but as everybody puts it, crisis in egypt. why do i emphasize the difference? mubarak's resignation might end the crisis, but will not end the revolution. crisis is the word of choice and forces of water and clintons of this world. it can end brief crisis, but not revolution. as a historian, i say future colleagues will call this revolution and i think we should. another remarkable difference is that today's revolution is above all the work of a specific group. i think we should call them the liberation generation in honor of those who have fallen in cairo's tahrir square. revolutions must not be judged on immediate results, but long-term structural changes, which sets them apart from the crisis. most textbooks would say revolution of 1848 in europe failed and short run that is true, yet their main goals,

democracy, universal primary education, workers rights, came to pass almost everywhere within a generation. that is a pattern that goes back to middle ages. 1381, they fought against surfdom. the king was 15, abolishes surfdom. he is murdered and they reestablish surfdom. revolt is crushed, but surfdom disappeared in the region within 25 years. the same thing happened in german ne1525. 80,000 peasants were massacred in reprises for revolt against surfdom. 25 years later, surfdom had disappeared. we can see also in other examples in the 19th century. the liberation generation in middle age that is to say in 2030 or 2040 will remember what they fought for. egypt in 2030 will be more democratic society, what is less certain there will be democratic

in the coming years. the thousands of older demonstrators long to see that happen. the u.s. acting like a state will move heaven and earth to prevent that from happening. state and republic, we often use them interchangeably,but they are profoundly different. in the last four centuries since the late 16th century, rulers of the western world and due to imperi imperialism commit the rule republic and state are one in the same thing. tunisians and egyptians have denounced the fraud for the monstrous lie that it is. the citizens collectively form the republic and supreme interest is collective good of the citizens and other inhab tants, which can be achieved and over the long run by ruling according to law of reason and justice. the supreme interest of the state is self preservation by any means necessary. the republic appears to be chaos and represents deeper order, justice achieved by reason. the principle around which it is

organized. philosophically, it is over. the state appears to be order, but is ordered chaos. the state has no principle beyond its own existence philosophically it is nothing. the state matters a great deal, it's a different issue. must carry out extraordinary balancing act and provide the order necessary for the republic and simple society to function. seeking to serve it must never become the master and of course that is where the problem is in these states, it is the master. states use the same technique to attack the public, fear. i have seen plenty of that in the united states in the last 10 years. the conund rum is how to create a state powerful enough to protect the republic, but weak enough to be unable to destroy it. the constant use of the term failed state ignores the fact that such places like somalia or afghanistan have failed political systems. they have no reflective group of

citizens committed to the law, reason and justice. without a republic only a state built on group force can survive. even such states could create as was just pointed out, justification for the exercise of power. states all over the world rely on force to survive. the greatest possible difficulty revolving to republics as we see in egypt today. >> we cannot ignore the state to

state dimension of international relations, of course, but exclusive focus on that dimension creates a work value system that leads the u.s. and france to support dictators like mubarak and alin. egypt we hear drum beat in favor of "democracy", but cynical idea of mubarak-ism. for those who have read -- what could be more embarrassing than the revelation that the ambassador, u.s. special envoy to egypt works for the law firm patton box, advises egyptian military, the egyptian and handled litigation on the mubarak government's behalf in europe and the u.s. last for the u.s. in the role of toto, film many are familiar with, pulled back the curtain and the state department convince as few people as wizard plaintiff, pay

no attention to the man behind the curtain. remarkably the u.s. did not recall him in response to revelation of conflict of interest, but only in light of his embarrassing revelation of the u.s.'s foreign policy. now in understanding a policy in public discussion of it, we have to go beyond him and pays over million dollars a year to lobbyists. led by the brother of president clinton's chief of staff and two former congressmen, and to be bipartisan about this, willie sutton theory of government, he knows where the money is. plm represented europe since 2007, including boeing and lockheed martin. the press -- but if you turn on

your television, for example, to pbs's newshour on the 27th of january to get analysis of the egyptian events, you had to listen to graham bannerman. he said some really stupid things. i was wondering, who is this guy. the newshour did not tell viewers in 2007, he was himself eshs jipt's chief official lobbyist in washington, d.c. you think they might reveal that before we had to listen to him. whether he offers analysis, the way he makes changes, president mubarak is strong and gives -- let me ask you to keep that in mind, key word. speaking out the empire this weekend, it was stated getting rid of mubarak is meaningless. he pointed to the tunisian case where key members like police

chiefs and interior ministers have been fired. i think it is far from a done deal. however, the internationally renowned eagle scholar, long-time advocate of human rights leads the reform division. we see classic case of state that denied existence of civic society. civil in the sort of -- civic society is fear of politics. many states have civil citizenship. you have protection from laws, self and property, but not necessarily civic. they define the highest role of the state order as highest goal of society. citizens in egypt and tunisia is collective interest of the citizens, not the privileged few. as is the case in states that have muzzled public debate for years on end, egypt and tunisia

politics built on on reason and justice. only revolution in the streets could break through and start the civic process. one danger of abolishing civic life, opposition to the state must shift to nonpolitical dimension of legitimacy and religion offers ideal method, whether janson-ismnfrance in the 18th century, catholicism in poland, luther an ism, islam or suni islam. one of those close to the other without thinking of the broader pattern is i think very revealing. the state will stop at nothing to say this, no lie blatant, no deed too evil. in the history department last week, kate brown, of university of maryland, offered chilling modern example of her talk in soviet and states and common reaction to the problems.

in the used that trick early 1930's. hitler kept a lot of his promises. that is pretty scary. he is the one causing the chaos. that was described by george orwell in "1984." the charges look like tit-for- tat. i would like to say a word about words. linguistically, the acting president of tunisia -- and 1789, they sensed the need to allow some public spirit.

he betrayed his misunderstanding of the reality. "i decided [unintelligible] that sounded the death knell of tunisia. in the state supreme interest that the government be a nationally in it. he thought the interest of the state. they hope that his commission will turn out to be the frankfurt assembly. that is a group of german intellectuals and university professors who gathered together to create a unified german state with a german

constitution. 18 months later, they sent a squad of police until then to go home. they cannot help themselves. i have decided -- he believed he wanted it. mubarak thinks he can give reform. others think they can ask the parents to go home and behave themselves for th. the western powers seem ready to betray our powers. state do not give a right. legitimate states recognize our in alienable rights.

demonstrators cannot negotiate about creating the political system because he is incapable of thinking about politics and set term. -- in that term. to nations and egyptians must not focus on its strength. they must focus on the weakness. they do not want to destroy that which is so necessary to the republic that he made very public the servant not a master of redemption -- master. they cannot stop with mubarak >.

as long as egypt has the police apparatus and a heavily alarmed presidential guard of 20,000, no free and fair elections are possible. the process will not be easy. the life has been systematically destroyed. they must learn that the problem is not one man and his close allies but a political systems that is with the republic's supreme. [applause] >> our next speaker is from george mason university. >> i am actually standing up.

[laughter] i will try a tv talk a bit brief -- i will try to be a bit brief because i have to go to the bathroom. my top of the disappointing. it is not about revolution. -- talk will be disappointing. it is not about revolution. we have gotten a good deal of analysis on the basis. i will be addressing economic reforms and how it got us to where we are today and will be talking about reform and social polarization in egypt. we have been witnessing development in egypt that many of us did not see coming. my recent war on the economy of

egypt has focused on issues that we are seeing today on the street. these are outcomes of of various kinds of reforms that they are addressing i never thought it would be this yellowfin so quickly. -- addressing. i never thought it to be this irrelevant so quickly. analysts rushed to dismiss economic factors, assuming that they are single-handedly producing the outcome. as we are inundated with news of the terms, it to be good to consider the history that eliminate the effect of reform on mass mobilization there.

i could have presented this a bit earlier. it might be relevant to other countries in the region and beyond. you will hear that it is replicated in many other countries. the caveat i want to start to it is the social polarization and did not produce the uprising without which you cannot understand the magnitude of what is happening. we have a tendency to focus on things on the surface. this will be quite boring. in 1991 with the world bank and the imf, henceforth -- it is

implemented to manage the egyptian financial crisis and put and ended tuesday management of the economy through market liberalization, privatization, and a shift toward an export oriented economy. what these were in today to improve the macro-economic hel alth, little consideration is a -- was given to the impact of the policies. in practice, they succeeded in reducing the role in managing the economy, and attracting foreign investment. the reform succeeded in creating social polarization between rich and poor.

it deteriorated living standards. it further exacerbated the negative side effects. there is a debate regarding what exactly caused the failure. is it the policies themselves are the obstacles related to the nature of the regime? this caused denature the question of the prescription that any person would have made clear in advance. from the research of the , it suggests gumm outcomes related to social

polarization are not explained by implementation. they play a big role. we must go back to the drawing board and emphasize trickle-down economics. within a few years, he did reduce the budget and controlled some of the balances. the state accomplished this by fundamentally altering the social contract between state and society. prior, led the state in egypt to the responsibility to give it to the people including welfare and education subsidies. in return, the publicl

acquiesced. these conditions were mitigated by the state support a apparatuses. -- by the state supported apparatuses. it is chipped away the safety net by weakening social welfare programs to a great degree. policies are important. as they affect the countryside to >> -- they affect the countryside.

they contribute to the polarization of society. the measures are implemented. it brought the end -- reforming it would lead to greater culture activity. measures you are motivated by the desire to open the market forces and to reverse the intervention policies. the sector has been privatized for them.

agriculture reforms have led to a greater social differentiation. they have a position of small holders. can i have a water, please? with high unemployment in the countryside, many such work in the manufacturing sector in what is already a strange urban market. many lack the skills and find themselves with few options.

there is the abrupt removal. this is been the goal of economic reform. to understand what economic reform has resulted in this, it is helpful to reply. effective development strategy involving policies that if she'd aggregate income growth -- in egypt and neither of these policies were being promoted in a way that reduces property predell. \ their concentrated in the hands

of wealthy farm owners. this is happening in egypt. there is no evidence of aggregate income in egypt for they have low employment. a small handful of people are now in the news. high employment sectors has seen the chun to be shin's decline -- high employment sectors have seen a decline. poverty has not been elevated either. it has increased from 17% of the population to 20% in 2005.

it is probably a few% higher at this time. living standards. where does this come from? the living standards results this. accompanying social polarization are deteriorating living standards that have abruptly removed social welfare's. they expose a vulnerable labor class. these policies have worsened in the position or done little to improve it.

the policies have had a multi prong effect. it goes considerably. there is an increase in imported commodities in production. finally, high inflation was not alleviated by reform. workers received considerably lower wages and benefits. consumers have subsidy cut. rising inflation has worsened the living standards of most egyptians. we have got into a boy in egypt

where in 2005 it became unbearable to mostly egyptians in 2005. these things cannot be measured. that is why revolutions cannot be predicted. they must pay on existing goods. after the 52 revolution, education became free. the world bank began advocating cost recovery measures to reduce the budgetary waste. in practice, this meant charging

user fees as a means of discouraging knossos serious students from wasting precious resources and putting pressure on teachers. the results was regressive. private tuition accounts for part of the budget. they have a way to add to the meager income. in further increases education costs. similar situations are occurring with regard to health care. user fees have increased.

we see this effect in edition popular culture. -- in egyptian popular culture. commodity prices have led to higher rates. this has caused many families to remove children from school to reduce expenses. they are selling off some of the assets such as a jewelry. well slump steps may alleviate short-term problems, the effects were a self-defeating. yom children had no chance of improving their status. many resort to sharing.

this increases in stability. they were left with few options. they cannot afford to plan for the future. because economic reforms were implemented, the functions were a band didn't or curtailed. --- were disbanded or curtailed. egypt was the best place to do business in 2008. it shows you the bifurcation of what is happening in the ground

and what institutions are interested in. macro economic conditions may have improved. the situation remains precarious. there is some semblance of a social safety net. i would like to conclude the bill because of the deterioration of the resources, they are much more vulnerable. and that people need the above by 2005. it is a very scary prospect. and last year006

when the numbers were calculated, more than 60,000 protests have taken place. what we are seeing today is new. i was in egypt last year. people have been falling this combination. economic reform helps to reform it.

reform has diminished living standards. it is adjusting chronic problems leading to social polarization and massive gaps. it might also be a cliche. i am not sure if it is good enough. it has led to the creation of a huge gap. it produces a deep and widespread stability. i will conclude. though economic factors tonight

explain the outcome we are witnessing, we cannot adequately understand this without having a good deal of attention to such factors. my concern is that what we just discussed needs to be part of the lessons learned what every the outcome. thank you. [applause] >> i will introduce myself provok.

i want to begin my comments -- i will move the microphone a little bit. i want to begin my comments tonight. matthew arnold was in 19th century poet and critic who watched as new social classes began to exert themselves and began to reflect on this. this is one of the processes that he was reflecting on. this process was alarming. it was a potential to what it event to the english. for him, culture could be used as a weapon to fight the class war.

this was a very stark choice. it is between culture and anarchy. on one hand, order that people had known that england was in the new anarchy pose by new classes of englishmen demanding to be recognized as citizens. in latin america, the same bifurcation and use of culture faces civilization and barbarism. in egypt, it has reared its head in interesting ways. culture is really not the issue of the revolutionary movement we are watching in egypt. culture is much a part of how these movements are unfolding the bill even if the state promotion. unfolding. even if the state promotion is not the specific issue, it does have something to do with what

is happening right now. if you have been witching -- watching, you have been listening to poetry. the slogans are poetic. they rhyme. if they are really created and they are fun to listen to prevent the second point-one to make is that from the very beginning people with very little understanding of the movement's have often decided to shift discussion away from what the processes are saying and toward the conversations about egyptian culture, arab culture, the culture of islam. this outpouring of culture talk is by no means without significance or usefulness. let me show one use. the demand for the revelations in tunisia and egypt have been straightforward.

it was an immediate end to the tyrannical regime. it was an end to one-party rule and police brutality and official corruption. more transparency and accountability increased meaningful relationships. the details might be complicated. no one can say that these demands are culturally specific. it does not mean very universal. the important thing is that they are not culturally specific. it seems that culture would have little explanation for it.

kohl to of was front and center in host name of bart's of public response -- it was front and center in the president hosni mubarak pose no public response. i said to obama, you do not understand the egyptian culture and what would happen the five resigned today. -- if i resigned today. culture or anarchy? the mention of egyptian culture figured as a way to channel it from the issues at hand which are crystal clear mubarak has been talking this way for 30 years now, telling the world that with his regime they will get stability and with the existing alternatives

[unintelligible] it is a 30 year old policy of fear mongering. this is the message that it is always been there. it is worth noting that this choice between stability and chaos has roots in a very old colonial have it. there are direct attitudes in the colonial viceroy used to talk about the unruly natives. it leaves that kind of attitude to those who talk about the muslim brotherhood. it got loose in some neighborhood. his remarks about the dim monoculture of egyptians were chosen to resonate with this old tradition of islam-aphobia.

it is also a cent to resonate with old egypt. this goes back to what james was talking about coming of the state and the republic. the state has put itself foreword further preven by this i am referring to that there circulate a belief that the egyptian people need a powerful state to get things done. the egyptian state or the idea that the egyptian state takes care of its citizens and provides for them or that egyptians cannot be expected to run their own society. unlike previous eras of -- of authoritarian rule, only a

portion of the egyptian seventh benefit did. -- have been effective. those who have had taken their money out as fast as they can. perhaps they were even contacted for positions. the vast majority of egyptians will not be mistaken to believe that they benefit very little from the states. this goes back to what they were talking about in terms of economic reform and the imf plans in the 1990's. in terms of public education will list some things we might associate with benefits that might accrue from a state in terms of public education and health care. a state services have been abysmal for decades. the salaries of teachers and doctors are at the sub level.

some hospitals are at the risk to public health. the arabic word for a hospital is "you will not get better." was some of the highest pollution rates, it is not is a prize that egyptians suffered huge rate of cancer and kidney disease. some of the highest in the world. road fatalities remain a leading cause of debt. -- death. sorry about this. tuesday that -- to say that infrastructure has been crumbling under mubarak is not a metaphor. it is literally the case.

egypt has been collapse since the early 1990's. to give an event that really brought this home, a 5.9 degree earthquake hit cairo in december 1992. the reader is anything people were killed. -- 373 people were killed. a corrupt system of building permit meant that thousands of sub-par buildings in urban egypt had been built. when the earthquake happened, i remember it vividly. it was terrifying. the state had no ability to respond to it at all. most of the first responders were citizen volunteers. medical aid was provided by many run from the muslim brothers.

when disaster struck, the muslim brothers and other groups with their predictive the state was almost nowhere to be seen. promises to rebuild the damage had been slow coming. 19 years later, and many buildings remain in dangerous disrepair from them. because of the lack of governmental oversight, egypt does not need earthquakes for this to happen. i will give you some highlights of this predicament. it 2003, 2007, every few months a building falls down in egypt leading to the deaths of many. the cause is invariably connected to contractors and bribing their way around state codes fro.

in this history of slow collapse, the 2008 landslide is most telling. it lets 109 -- 8 lead. it led to 109 people dead and many homeless. what is not apparent is that this disaster was man-made. right they standrigh at the foot and the hills. in years, the site and the development projects encouraged fierce real-estate speculation and speculation -- for housing.

newgate communities went up along with all the trappings of good life. local residents had complained that water seepage is began soon after the development began. -- seepages began soon after the development began. when it caught international attention, amnesty international got involved. the government finally initiated an investigation because they te.ermined was fake but but if it has the state brought most egyptians under his rule?

a colleague of ours and george mason university has reflected partly on this issue. she writes "one of the achievement of the protests had been to shown the irrelevance of the mubarak state itself. editions have sharon a degree of self-reliant -- egyptians have shown a large degree of self- reliance. food and medicine have been distributed garbage has been collected. it is often undertaken without the police coming army, or other state entity. the square itself has taken on the attributes of thea sovereign state. their own foreign policy is a system for food and medical

care. they did some people have shown that they do not need it. this is quite remarkable. egyptians got together to protect themselves from the state. they did not needed begin this has been the problem -- they did not need it. this has been the problem. what has developed is a do-it- yourself spirit. i want to quote one of my favorites twitters that came out of a human rights activist. he writes.

i am a poor street kid. my pants are falling down. we dismayed a revolution here. what have you done? this is what you see speeding up all over the place. -- springing up all the plays. i wanted speak a few words about state and culture. a one on friday, mubarak fired s previous cabinet and installed a new one. it does three generals, a formaer ambassador and business associates. what 30 of their ministry posts

remained vacant, he appointed -- while 30 other ministry posts remain vacant, he created a new ministry. the politicization of the ministry of culture during the early 1990's, the mubarak regime faced serious threats to islamist insurgencies capit it discovered the glories of secular culture. it seeks new allies. it was an unlikely marriage given the repression control. there were carrots and sticks. the same intellectuals were high-profile target. they faulted them for their .upposed secularism

one barely survived in a tent on his life. other leading intellectuals also faced serious threat to their life. many served harassment. the response of the regime to the crisis was deliberately ambiguous. it weighs a low-level war against the islamists in the urban slums. it increased investment in the institutions. it presented itself as a true representative of is long. -- of islam. it opened new investments in the ministry of culture, headed for

many years by an artist for .heir -- artisti well what's important the tears fell into disrepair -- well once important theaters fell into disrepair, the ministry had projects that range from the sublime to the banal. besides these activities, there were opportunities for employment for many >> in the litter a sector, -- for many. in the literary sector, egypt is not alone. this is what ministries of

cultures have done across the arab world. this is an example that is quite close to many other situations from the gulf to morocco. many writers who may otherwise be unemployed or barack through government patrons. the state went from being one of the chief obstacles to one of the cheap protectors -- chief protectors of culture. given the eclectic character, whatever they were doing with a single rhetoric. they were engaged in a battle

for it life. on one side was the forces of religious ignorance. he was talking about this bifurcation. it is not different from the way other ministries happen politicized knowledge. they are tinting to divide and corrupt intelligence zia -- are attempting to divide and corrupt intelligence. in light of the kind of state violence is a way they brought it into the war. if anything, as part of the

state program. to conclude, state kolter was never really a deep culture in these places for deni. some of it was classical and some colloquial. they are mobilizing old and new forms. there are vince plain gray now. this is happening all over egypt.

the relationship of egyptians is one that is going to be characterized by this do-it- yourself spirit. we do not need a ministry of culture to tell us what good poetry is. this poetry is a good and beautiful thing. i will stop there and made room for questions and answers. [applause] >> questions. >> ok.

we had revolts against colonialism. can this be seen as a revolt against neo-colonialism? how should we take stock of the polish world war ii on human rights? where is the place of that and what is going on in egypt? >> i think part of the dichotomy is not entirely driven simply by a world of you but by political calculations. it has been one of the great tensions in american foreign

policy. when it comes to certain areas, and it is not a question of value if that shaved policy- making -- that shapes policy making. i do not see this as an essential nature. it depends on how you interpret the episode. these are issues that dominate not only the way the history of the region is interpreted but how of the interpretations can begin to policy making. there is this tension between the rhetoric and the policy itself. this will feed it nicely into

-- feeds nicely into his answer. the answers are there at the height of the colonial period. there are a natures of discrimination. there is always this disconnect. >> most of us know what colonialism is. i do not think most of us would put the same components under the title of a " neo- colonialism." i didn't know exactly how to answer that the d.; there is literature that is very important in recognizing what is happening in the developing countries. the masses have been studied by a geologist's and historians.

there is the policy. this is a fantastically to debunk a lot of arguments florida are these people revolting against neocolonialism? i personally do not think so they are affecting people's lives. i think most of these people are fed up with the allied positions in which they find themselves. what we are seeing is a result of a series of small uprisings in various kinds of uprisings.

i do not know we can characterize this as a revolt against neo-colonialism. it might explain the deteriorating conditions of these people. -- of people. not these people. >> there is a lead media coverage that has taken place across the region. was in 1979 and 1989? is it like the berlin wall? i think that juxtaposition -- on

one hand it can either open up to the west are go the opposite way. can we say that it is with france in a cultural revolution? it seems to go in a different direction. is the role of twister -- twitter over played it? generate 28 from all communique -- all -- january 28, of -- all communication was off in the foreseeable into the street. >> [inaudible]

>> i will take on that one in a different way than you would anticipate. if we both get lots of different historical revelations and get away from the american fixation on recent events, a lot of what we have seen bears close resemblance to patterns for example of 18484 1917. with the egyptian army issued its own people? historically, armies did not like to shoot their own people. it is against their professional keep those. e --thos -- ethos. armies did this sometimes. most of the times they do not.

i am surprised the egyptian army shot their own people. more dubious is what did the professional guard with street people. i thought they would and they did. that makes perfect sense. we were accurate in the beginning that a lot of the looting was done by government agents and hire funds -- thugs. as soon as a result they put it come and look like delivered vandalism by police thugs because no one stole anything. you would probably take it if you were there at some type of vicious person. that seems to make sense. some of these things are very dangerous. you bring in a few legitimate

figures. you have a government of national unity. you hold elections down to 1968. you have these demonstrations in the street. the government talks about chaos. they should about 3000 workers. they are trying to get some server brokered deal with elections a sometime >s. the americans are having.

the roundabout may and june the start arresting the people. they have often on television. a number of people have talked about the fact that this will have them. and number of the other leading people were shocked. that is a very likely outcome. that to your points about the social and economic, why did louis xvi shoot the people? because they were the middle class. the middle class does not like it when they shoot them. they will not lone them any money anymore. and louis could not shoot the

demonstrators in paris and still floating loans. what happened? the interest-rate jump to to 7.2%. it is now back down to 6.2% today. the government's credit rating. just above junk bond status. now, the credit rating is going to bounce back. it suggests is that some of the players, the saudis, bought some of their bonds, and this tells you that some of the deals in the works, the key guys negotiating deals, one of the biggest businessmen in that country is a billionaire who has close ties to suleiman, that is what is going on behind the scenes. i do not say that is what is going to happen, but the parallels are very strong. except in the case of 1968, i think that is very much like the to be the case but the forces of

order, right after chaos. they tend to be the beneficiaries, most of the time. it is a frightening -- is what the americans are counting on. lisner made obvious last week, that is what they are trying to do. >> one point, looking at the comparison between 1979 and 1989, the position was relatively unequivocal. there was very little ambiguity in the u.s. message in 1989 or in 1979, but this is not exactly what you are seeing today in the case of egypt. there is a lot that obviously has impacted the comment about to not necessarily look at that as a form of so-so media but to look at how -- social media but

to look at how they present information, and now, it is a little bit more complicated than taking control of radio and tv stations, and managing this explosion in virtual communication is going to rapidly change the way government interacts with their citizens in the arab world. that is what i was trying to say. >> the point, the egyptian government today announced a 50% wage increase for all state employees. >> right. >> so this ties into the type of package of things very typically done in early revolutionary moments, you buy off the those, and if you love a big state sector, it affects a lot of people, and they want to get paid. -- if you have a big state sector. >> next question. yes? >> concerning the comment about

the bifurcated world order versus anarchy, it shows that even without the government, the people can organize themselves. do you think that is overly optimistic? the situation, it is one thing for a society to be unified in the face of a commonly recognized situation, but once the enemy disappears, there is waning interest. there are competing ideas that manifest themselves, and then, without some type of institution that can prioritize the interests, then there be, warring factions -- there becomes warring factions, in the anarchy begins. without the stability, then there needs to be another dominant, suppressive

organization that comes up again. >> well, i will lead james to talk about or to address the 18th-century political situation that is informing the question. it -- i will leave james to talk about it. there is no reason for us to be optimistic. in other words, there is no reason to think -- at no moment was there a clear reason to think that this would succeed, and, in fact, since maybe the 28th, there have been signs that whatever momentum the movement had had already been coopted and deflected by larger players, even outside of egypt, but i would take seriously the notion

that without a state, people must necessarily fall into chaos. it simply is not the case in egypt, and what i was trying to show, and i think -- the history of the last 20 years in egypt shows that by and large, there has not been an effective state in most people's lives in egypt. in the sense of a state that would provide any benefits. there has been a very strong state in the sense of a state that will be no violence, either for a perceived enemy or in the case of egypt, indiscriminately, but i guess i would say that the people, no matter what happens in the coming weeks and months, i think people know quite clearly and understand quite clearly, or at least a significant number of egyptians know, that the state is not their friend. the state is the enemy in this

case, and i was trying to give expression to that, without being overly optimistic, although i would not buy into that view of the world. would you? >> well, there has been a huge influence in the last 20 years, some people talking about how you should not keep agreements, because there is no impartial arbiter to enforce them. therefore, they are not worth the paper they're written on. the existence of norms modifies people's behavior, and that does not mean the be a perfectly and follow the norms completely, god forbid, but it does, in fact, modify international states' behavior's, as well, and it is

state to state. to me, and osama talked about this many times. i have talked about them with my former colleague, talking about in the early 1990's and in the on a purelys, intellectual local -- level -- one could argue that there is a two-republic solution, but there is no two-state solution. they feel all of the time trying to achieve something that is intellectually impossible, so i think that some of these ideas actually matter on the ground a great deal, when you start dealing with it. >> a question? >> i really thought your presentation on the republic was fascinating, and in some likely or unlikely case, when someone

comes to power, or whatever it may be, this profound anti- american or anti-western or anti-colonial sentiment in egypt will, i mean, i think that there is a general attitude of a sort of we need to have some nativism rather than un-islamic, the egyptian, arab in egypt, and i am wondering if that may produce some backlash, some hindrance to the eventual emergence of republican ideals in egypt. >> well, in these cases, there are lots of hindrances. one of the first hindrances in a place of egypt with respect to its relationship with the united states is, as a couple of other people pointed out without using the term, they take on this, the

west, that the egyptians really are not up to that sort of thing. they cannot deal with it themselves, and the assumption there is partly about islam but is partly about race, i would say. but the other problem you face when you korea a republic, and i might say, one person has been very clear. he does not think elections are possible. he does not think there is a way to have a free and fair election in anything less than one year. he is no dummy. but if you look at the french example, if you look at the american examples in the 18th- century, creating in the republic was a very complicated thing. you have these different groups, back to this question of different ideas, everyone is united against but in favor of different things afterwards, and then you have the issue of, how do we deal with oppositional politics when your traditional policy system is that no opposition has been tolerated? so in the french revolution, we

have robespierre chopin of the heads of his enemies. and -- chopping off the heads of his enemies. it is not like the united states immediately transitions to this wonderful were public. we thought this brutal civil war 85 years later to work out some of the problems, so the idea that republics easily transition, a system like this easily transitions into a republic, that is kind of a mythology we have about america, but when we look at africa, why are african states that became states in the 1960's having so many problems? where was america 50 years after 1787? right? it is not like everything was all wonderful and they were all united. they were pretty divided, and they were about to start slaughtering each other. the modern world news faster, i will go along with that, but

some of these problems are very significant problems. what is the idea of a loyal opposition? as you know, in the united states, there were the million and sedition acts. just think of the duel. these two guys cannot figure out how to deal with political opposition, so the secretary of the treasury and the vice president of go out and have a duel, and one of them kills the other. there is politics for you. so i do not think we should. difficulty of what these people are proposing to do, not simply in egypt but in a larger framework almost everywhere. it has not been an easy thing to do. >> the presentation -- my question is, putting it on the internet. >> we have not considered it, but we will.

thank you. >> yes, stay tuned to the center's website. >> i did not think mine was worth it, but thank you. [laughter] well, if there is no more questions -- oh, there is one more question. >> from our perspective, in other parts of the country, maybe because of the media, not having media coverage to their, protests, or something like that. why is that? and are there substantial movements of side of cairo? -- outside of cairo? >> i can say a couple of words, but it is really as somebody who is obsessively trying to follow this.

one thing is that the financial times seems to be reporting more outside of khyber than anybody else. and the egyptian daily is reporting far more widely than tahrir square and telling different stories. this story is going to really emerge as one of the most important ones, in the city of suez, which i do not know much about, the details, but that has been the site of some of the fiercest competitions and the most steadfast sort of resolve on the part of the movement. would you wall add anything? -- all add anything? is there a difference between rural and other manifestations in egypt? >> no.

i mean, if you are glued to the television set, and you look at aljazeera, alan korea -- alpharetta yeah -- al-arabia, especially in larger centers, because this is where, even if you are not like in that center, like you actually go to the center, and this is where you congregate, so you will hear about suez. you will hear about alexandria. i think i am looking at the wrong person. hi. so you will see it everywhere. so that is the answer. it is everywhere. the symbolism of tahrir square is what captures the attention.

the calculus of people with cameras and so on. so i would not mistake what we focus on on television. even on aljazeera, i think it over emphasized what is going on in tahrir square, the phenomenon. i would just add a shameless plug. there is an electronic magazine that addresses these issues at length, like mortgages particular articles, and it has gotten so many hits that the website crashed a couple of times. i am part of this. you will find dozens of greenpeace's from the ground, as well, that discuss this -- note dozens of pieces from the ground -- you will find dozens

of pieces from the ground. >> one of the things that struck me is that these are taking place is at sites where the anonymity of participants can be high enough. this was really important in the first few days, when there was much at stake and a lot could be lost. in other words, no one lives in tahrir square. tahrir square is a place to try to get out of as soon as possible, and the idea that people would stay there is quite astonishing. it is a place where you could go where you might not be known, and this is important. people are identifying themselves, as james pointed out, and that is, i think, a remarkable as a sign of how confident they have become, although the price will not go away.

in other words, there may be ramifications. this is why people are going to alexandria or tahrir in cairo. >> what i would suggest is that european media have a lot of different stuff than american media, so if you look at the french press, for example, they have much better coverage of the provincial cities. i have not had a chance, i have meant to do that this morning, the italian press, they probably have a good amount of stuff on alexandria, just guessing, and some of the things are in the french press. for example, last week, when a person from morocco recently flew 10 days ago to have talks with sarkozy about how to keep himself in power, and spanish newspapers report that some of the troops in the western sahara have been removed and brought into casablanca and another

area, and i have not seen a word on that from anybody. maybe it is false. who knows? if you read those, you can get access to information that is not part of the conversation here. >> well, thank you very much for your attention, and think you all -- thank you all. [applause] >> nice meeting you. keep up the good work. [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] [captioning performed by national captioning institute] >> in a few moments, the tea party town hall meeting with members of congress.

in an hour and a half, the response to the political unrest in egypt. after that, the transportation report on the acceleration problem in toyotas. and later, british prime minister david cameron and what he thinks is a failure in great britain. on "washington journal" tomorrow morning, we will talk to note representative -- to representative jay inslee, and senator john barrasso joins us, and we will look at the future of community service block grants with the head of the community action partnership, don mathis. "washington journal" is live every day at 7:00 a.m. eastern. up next, tonight's t hall -- the

tea party town hall meeting with members of congress. speakers include senators orrin hatch and rand paul, along with steve king and michele bachmann. this is about 1.5 hours. while our members are getting miced up, i will tell you that these have grown leagues and downs. our two-year anniversary is coming up in just a few weeks.

we can have rallies until the end of time and protests, but, ultimately, if you want to change what is going on in washington, you have to change your players in washington, and the tea party express got involved in the political aspects, in the campaigns, and we all work together to bring new members of congress here to represent our principles and values of the tea party movement and to have people here that we know that we can work with, and so, we thought that we need to have an open dialogue, a working relationship, because we all want to get our country back on the right track, and so, we thought we would do this first, a historic town hall with members from both the house and the senate, to be here and to listen to us, we, the people, the constituents from around the country, and, obviously, people here in washington, so we have taken questions online, virtual

questions, so that is what we are doing here tonight, and i want to kick it off by introducing somebody we have been very proud for, the great state of kentucky, the south, and he has really come into washington and has shaken things up, i would say, senator rand paul. [applause] and i am going to rand paul first, because i personally want to thank him. i want to thank him personally for starting the first tea party, as in the united states senate. [applause] >> stay hooked up? but i cannot walk with a wire. do you want me to come over there? i will stay here, because i am

already wired. i have masked upper -- up my wire. i have already messed up my wire. do you want me to come over there? all right, all right. now we really feel like we are at a grass roots rally with all of that. well, thank you very much for inviting me. i think the tea party is just an amazing thing. i have not seen anything like this. i was involved in politics, in my dad was running in the 1970's, and the reagan election in 1976 -- and my dad was running in the 1970's. this is a movement that comes not only from the people, but it is city by city. if you want to believe that the tea party does not come from the top down, realize that every city has a tea party, and they do not necessarily always relate to the next city's tea party.

it is city by city by city. it all came together at one time, really, i think, spontaneously. i went to the tea party april 15, 2009, on the square. i was coaching baseball for my 11-year-old son. i said, "i will be gone for 20 minutes," with other people who had been yelling at the television set like me for years. they said when we came to washington, "we will be coopted. they will co of the us." the week before we are sworn in or two weeks before we are sworn in, we had the republican caucus and earmarks. i get here, and i hear a first state of union, and it was, "it is like we have, what did the president. the president know gets these." is a real problem.

i see that and feel the significance of the situation changing because of the tea party. i am glad to be part of it. it is not even now being led by me or mike or west or michele bachmann. we are not telling the tea party what to do. they are still telling us what to do. we can be part of the solution. but we are still asking what the tea party once, and i am glad to be a part of it -- what the tea party wants. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, senator. i guess we will go straight down the line. the latest member of the tea party caucus in the house of representatives, congressman west.

[cheers and applause] and senator mike lee from utah. he is new on the hill, another great conservative friend. so do you want to come up here? >> i will stay right here. this one works. that way, i can use both hands. it makes it easier for me. i am still getting used to this tethered-microphone situation. i am glad to be here tonight and with some of my colleagues that are here from both houses of congress. this is an important movement. this is a moment that is not a passing fad. interestingly enough, there was a profile piece done on the in "the washington post" over the

weekend, and it was kind of odd because it was in the "seinfeld" section, and if someone had told me years ago that i would be in the "seinfeld" section, i would have thought that to be awed -- it was odd because it was in the section, and if someone had told me years ago that i would be in the "style" section, i would have got to be odd. you see, if he thought about it very much, he would realize that the tea party movement did not start on february 19, 2009, when that first meeting happened somewhere in florida. it started in 1773, when a group of americans decided they had had enough. this was not based in

washington, d.c., because this place really did not exist then, as such, and that government was oppressive to the people. it did not respond to the concerns of the people and was slow to respond to the needs of the people, and they decided to take some action, to show them what they did not want out of their national government. it took us years to get from boston -- to get to boston, where we did decide what we wanted to get out of our national government. that is an important step. it is interesting. the set of principles that they explained is still the same as it is today. the tea party movement today reached the same conclusion, that our national government is far from what we call a general police power, passing any laws

they think is important. really, our national government is set up to do just a few things, to control our borders, establish a uniform system of weights and measures, conduct laws governing copyrights, patents, and trademarks, our defense, and then there is one that i hope to exercise one day, the power to issue letters. all past and issued by congress in the name of the united states -- all passed and issued by congress in the name of the united states about piracies on the high seas korea -- high seas. but the point is, there is no power granted in that document. to tell us where to go to the doctor and have to pay for it. there is no power to tell us to do a lot of the things they are

trying to do, is it? america is coming together and is saying the american government has limited power, and it is time that its legislative body, congress, starts acting like there is some limit to its power. that is why we are here. that is why we are not going away. [applause] >> thank you, senator lee. now, congressman west. >> i will make sure i do not trip, because a lot of people would have fun poking fun at me on youtube, but it is fun to be with you here this evening, and as senator orrin hatch asked me, "how are you enjoying this," as i said, i protected the issues that make this country so great as it is, and now, to have the opportunity to serve in the u.s.

house of representatives, i am and body in the american dream, because years ago -- i am in bodying -- embodying the american dream, because years ago, my parents would never believe that i would be standing here. that is what makes the american dream boat -- dream. some people come after the tea party because they do not understand it, and other people come after the tea party because they are afraid of it, but if they recognize that this is a constitutional, conservative, grass-roots movement, so now, all of a sudden, folks are going back to reconstitution and the federalist papers, and when you talk about montesquieu, locke, hobbs, when you talk but the fact that people are getting together to look at these large

pieces of legislation and having legislation reading parties and then coming back together with summary sheets, this is an incredible thing that is happening in our republic, and it is truly what the founding fathers wanted it to become a representative democracy, so you have people you have elected to come here to speak your voice, that you can continue to watch these people accountable to simple things. they want effective and simple constitutional government. understanding the left and right limits, the mandates for the federal government. that is what we have to get back in line. the preamble to the u.s. constitution establishes this, to provide for the common defense, to secure liberty. those are the mandates that we have, and when we have people who do not really understand this whole thing with illegal immigration and bringing a lawsuit against a sovereign

state in the united states of america, all you have to do is good to article 1, section 10, and others, and understand that if we fail in our responsibility at the federal-government level, the state has every right to defend itself. [applause] so i am absolutely honored that i can stand with the american people, and anyone who does not want to believe in the effective and constitutional government, anyone who does not want to believe in our national security, being able to identify the threats from our enemies and the emerging capabilities that cause us concern note, it you know, i served at fort hood, texas -- cause us concern, you know, i served at fort hood, texas. someone gunned down 43 of our warriors and also civilian contractors, killing 13.

we are on the 21st-century battlefield which is totally different than any battlefield we have ever stood on, and we have to be very serious about the security for the future generations of americans, and then the last thing the tea party stands for is the free enterprise solutions. they believe there is risk out in the free market, but it is the inherent responsibility of ceo's and then out in the private sector to mitigate those risks. it is not about you, the taxpayer, coming out and then being held responsible for their field practices. those are the three cornerstones police of the tea party, national security, free-market, free enterprise, and everyone here in washington, d.c., who does not believe in death, then they do not know what made the united states of america great -- who does not believe in fact, than they do not know what made

united states of america great. van they do not know -- then they do not know what made the united states of america great. so it is my honor to be here with you. but >> thank you, congressman. >> i was not leaving. the senators, they boogied out. i see there are free hot dogs here. >> i thought everybody was leading me. senator hatch? thank you so much for being here tonight, and all of these rowdy tea party people. >> i have said before on a number of occasions, but let me just say that i am proud to be here with these wonderful men. i am going to vote for your vote -- for you. this is not working?

then maybe i had better use this one. this one is not working either. ok, i will bring it up closer. we are in perilous times. we now have a $14 trillion national debt. by 2020, according to the presidential action korea, that will be over $20 trillion -- according to the presidential figures. this country cannot take that, and we are not going to take that, and the fact of the matter is we have to fight for the country. i have been in the senate 34 years. i have worked on every judge that has come through, and i have to say that one of the biggest issues of picking the president is that that president is going to pick the judges in this country, one-third of the separated power in this country, and you really get a different

set of judges when you have a democrat in the white house, and, frankly, this is what has evolved here in many respects. 1982, strom thurmond and i led the fight for the balanced budget amendment, the first time it passed by a record two-thirds vote. we brought it to the senate, and we got 66 votes later. there were two people, who i will not mention their names, but we had the votes, and it had been passed in the house, and we have got to work very closely together and get that balanced budget amendment passed, because if we do not, we will not get spending under control, because it is too easy to go around the current system and continue to spend. i have been in the senate 34 years, and we have never had a fiscal conservative majority. usually the more from blue states, who will go with the democrats on most spending

issues. even bill clinton, from time to time. the fact of the matter is is that we need to have a fiscal conservative majority, and that is what the tea party is going to do. [applause] and let's just take the health- care bill. the constitution comes into play in so many ways. i was the one you raised the issue of the job-killing employer mandate. that is a big issue, because if that is allowed to stand by the current supreme court, and there are differences on this issue throughout the country, and i have to say, if that is allowed to stand, it will be the first time in history that that type of situation would actually fit within section 8 of the constitution, and i have to tell you, in order to have article

one, section 8, work, it has to be in commerce. it is not to force someone to buy what they do not want to buy. if we go that far, it means united states government can do anything to you that it wants to, and there are no limitations. liberty is built on limitations, and, frankly, when there is no liberal -- limitations, liberty is gone, so we are really looking at some very, very important things right now, and i, for one, what to think the tea party for what they have done. -- want to thank the tea party. they are going to double the unemployment tax from $7,500 to $15,000, so they have money for more employment in this country -- $1,500.

the businesses are not going to put up with that, and they would just get rid of employees. we have to remember of the things that made this country so great. all i can say is that i am so grateful for this great nation and what it means to the world. i have been all over the world for our country, and i have to tell you, everywhere the we go, people have always been amazed, and yet, we are in danger -- everywhere that we go. i am very happy to have all of the wonderful citizens fighting side-by-side and doing everything they can to get this country back. god bless you, and thanks for being who you are. [applause] >> thank you, senator.

right on time. congressman steve king. >> thank you very much. thank you very much. my tiny, apparently, is impeccable -- my timing. my wife will never agree with that. the calvary has arrived, 87 freshmen. they are the constitutional conservatives that have been produced by the heart and soul of constitutional america, fiscally responsible people, as well, and they have arrived just in time, when congress has been way too much money, and the president has done this. we need to turn this around in the vision of our founding fathers. there is much to talk about. we talk about the debt ceiling that comes up in a couple of

months later. the debt ceiling is not the pivotal thing we are looking at. the c.r. is the pivotal item we are looking at. i was working at the president and harry reid as much as i could, and then the next 30 days, we will do it all over again. i would do that every 30 days. we need to. [applause] and yet, it seems that that decision may have been made to extend funding out to the end of the fiscal year, september 30. it will be the largest appropriations bill times 5 ever voted on by congress before, even though it will be rolled back to 2008 level, and it will still be five times larger than anything voted for before but -- before. i can get my mind about that,

but the most important pivotal component of important pivotalc.r. -- important pivotal we canwith the c.r., choose this grant to fight on, and if we can stand cella, there is not -- we can choose this ground to fight on. and if we can stand, it will be possible to shut off any spending to be used this year to a force obama care -- to enforce obama care. those of you know me know that i am not easily satisfied. there is the position i have taken. >> ready? >> solutions waiting for a problem.

so in december, when it became clear, when the c.r. was tasked to fund the government, we must not only shut off all funding for obama care for the rest of this fiscal year, but we should follow the model of the funding that shut off the four -- what shut off the funding for the vietnam war. that is there, and it exists in other scenarios, as well. notwithstanding any other section of law, all funds that have been heretofore appropriated, and obama care automatically appropriates as well as of the rises, we can shut those ofcom and if we do not come obama in here will become a growing malignant tumor -- we can shut those off, and if we do not, obama care will become a growing megan touma wrote -- malignant tumor.

shutting off all funding that has been put in the pipeline for the funding of obama care must be done. fight on. if we do not fight on this ground, i do not know how we win. >> thank you, congressman king. so we're going to go to our first question. haute >> all right, first question. >> thank you. can i address any of them? i am from pennsylvania, and i am the co-chair of an organization, and my question to congressman king, a good friend of mine, it is, what is congress going to do to stop the fed from printing money like it is going out of style? it is causing an inflationary style -- time. >> the first answer is to do something with the fed.

and then, to follow up on that, i think we have got to expand this national dialogue, and part of what goes on is that the american people have to be the ones pushing on congress. they are also reactive, so the higher we raise the knowledge base, the better chance we have to slow down the inflationary base to support that. thank you. >> and our next question is going to come from youtube. >> you have to read their lips. >> government benefits? >> anybody care to jump into that one? senator? >> this is the problem of our

time. this is exec be the reason why we have to have a balanced budget amendment in place, because cuts are going to be painful. cuts are painful by definition. that is why they are called cuts, but we have to have them in order to prevent things from getting a lot worse, which they very, very quickly will. study said and done recently, looking and economies that have collapsed under the weight of excess of national debt, and what a number of economists have concluded is that once a nation debt to gdp ratio passes the 90% threshold, it starts to really impair the nation's economic growth, to the tune of about 1% per year. instead of growing 3%, it might grow 2%, 2.5%, 2%. that can result in to job losses

of about 1 million over the course of a single year. we are now close to, we are between 90% and 100% with our debt to gdp ratio. some say it is 100% already, depending on what figures to look at. the job losses we are incurring are painful. the inflationary cycle that we are already in and that is about to get a lot worse in the next few years is going to be painful, so a pain-free exit is not an option. i wish it were, but it is not. and that is part of what the tea party wilckens should be to our national dialogue, is this an acknowledgement that a paid free exit is not really on the table, so we have to look at the one that is going to do the least amount of damage and restore government in the process. that is why i think we need a balanced budget amendment. my colleague from my home state, senator hatch, has proposed another.

we need some version of the balanced budget amendment to pass. with all due respect to those who served in this body over the last few decades, our money has not been well managed. i hope that you do not disagree with me too much on that. that is not an overstatement. and so, congress has to be put in a straitjacket so that it cannot continue to do this. we have got to draw this line. once this line is drawn, then we can fight about exactly where the cuts will go, but we have to fight that battle first, and we have to win that battle, so, please, contact your representatives in congress and make sure they vote for this. >> yes? >> hi. congresswoman bachmann. >> congresswoman bachmann. [cheers and applause] >> the ultimate ideological

question for the united states of america is, in this country, can it survive? that is what we're talking about. we're talking about, when you look at the objective of this current government, if they can get more people wedged into the the government either by subsistence check or in " mischa, what happens when the production cuts is exceeded? when you look at the fact of our progressive tax good system, where you have 47% of americans who are not paying federal income tax, and we are you talked about how they want to raise the unemployment tax on our businesses. bill hall goal is to meet more americans victims, and that is not part of who we are, and if we allow that to happen, in the united states of america as we know it, we will not be able to pass this on to subsequent generations, and i do not think anybody here wants to be a member of the first generation that leaves something less for

the children and grandchildren, so that is something we have to recognize, and by 2045, for example, if we do not get retirement programs under control, we will forever be a permanent bar were nation, -- borrower nation. the people know what is facing us, but if we in washington continue along with the belief of the election cycle sound bite rhetoric, where we tell people every two years or every four years or every six years what we think they want to hear so we can get reelected, then we will continue to go down the road to perdition. it is time right now for visionary leadership to stand by and say there is a situation, but you know, it is not just about the united states of america. we always find a way out. you go back to the first battle of world war ii, north africa,

in the united states military got there butts handed to them, but they brought in a different type of leader, and they kicked tailcoat -- tailcoat -- tail from there, and that is what we need to do. >> kong worse womanbachmann, -- congresswoman bachmann, thank you for being here. she is on a really tight schedule, so we would like you to give us a few ideas of what you are here, why the tea party movement is important, and then we have a question for you. >> there is only one reason why i am here, and it is because of everyone who is here and everyone is watching. you are the reason we're all here, because we heard what the american people were saying in the last two years, and we

resonated with the american people. we agreed with them, and we were thankful with them, because of all of the people we are watching, they are the cowberry that came in and did the rescue work in this last election. -- they are the calvary that came in and did the rescue work in this election. especially the election of 2008. we saw such a change in this country that we've never seen before. i will be 55 years old. i never, ever thought i would live to see the day when the press -- federal government would own the largest bank in america, a private bank, or when the federal government would own the largest insurance company in america, aig, or the fact that the federal government essentially just a full ownership of fannie and freddie, and those are not just crazy aunts and uncles up in a room somewhere, in the cellar.

the federal government owns 50% of all privately owned mortgages, so anyone listening, half of you who have a private home mortgage, the government under home right now. about it, and the government also for the first time owns the largest car companies in america. it also own 100% lock stock and barrel the industry, and i think the final thing that was the frosting on the cake was the federal government taking over the health-care industry, because that is what it is. they will eventually realize their goal of collapse in the private health insurance industry, and then they will take it over -- of collapsing the private health-insurance industry. that is the federal government, a provider of health care, but that is not the system that brought us to this country. we have always been about free markets. that is who we are.

that is the beauty. if you look through all of our history, we have been about risk takers, the people who came to the united states, other than native americans who were here, all of us have the same story, and the story is we came from someone who was a risk taker from their country, it does not matter what their country is, but they took a risk, and they came here, and they knew when they came here, they were not coming for a welfare state. they were not coming for an insurance -- note for unemployment insurance. whatever their abilities to take them to whatever heights that they could do, it is a uniquely american, and what is wonderful is that this country did not attract rich people. if you were rich, you were going to stay where you were. you were doing pretty well. we did not attract nobility. if you were nobility, you stayed where you were.

who do we attract? people who wanted a better life and who did what it took to get it. necessity is the mother of invention. it works, and they made it happen. this was the place, literally, where dreams come true, and we have done that. do you realize that 21 generations in this country, 21 in generations, for 21 generations, every generation has successfully passed the torch of liberty and freedom to the next generation, and i think it is different now in 2011. i think that question is up for grabs, on the table. no one is really quite sure if we will successfully transfer that torch of liberty to the next generation, and i mean begins today who are 18 to 24 years of age. will they successfully come to their prime earning years in a

country that is truly free? because i think it is almost breathtaking to even say it, but can we truly say that today, we are truly free? are we truly free? i think what we know that we have obama care hanging over us, and we know that we have the epa under orders by president obama to, despite the fact that congress did not pass this law for cap and trade, the president is, you know, full speed ahead. let's put it into play. is that want the american people want? are you kidding me? they do not want a new national energy package. over the rest of the economy, and now, once the energy industry, too. -- he once the energy industry. no, you cannot have it. watching or listening by radio, people are saying, "we want to

the american dream back, because even though we are not guaranteed an income, we are guaranteed health care, we want the right to choose our own destiny. we do not want the federal government to do that for us." that is what i see, that is what i see. >> just real quick because i know you have to run, but i have a question from todd in oklahoma city, okla., and he says, "how do you respond to the criticism in the house and it said that it is divisive and not in the best interests of the nation, the tea party movement?" >> well, i would say you have not been to the tea party caucuses in the house and in the senate, because far from being divisive in any way, i think what we are trying to do is bring together a great unity. that is what we saw in the last election, because, quite literally, the