McGill Tribune

Dear Vicky,

When I woke up on Tuesday and decided to read the Tribune, I had the misfortune of coming across your piece, “Democracy is not a right,” in which you admitted that you were originally against the Egyptian protests on the basis that they would “wreak havoc” in the region. Correct me if I’m wrong, but was that gulp a thinly-veiled way of saying that you were worried about Israel’s security? It’s not always about Israel, you know. According to your logic, it’s acceptable to subjugate hundreds of millions of people for the sake of “stability.” How would you feel if someone told you that Jews (or any other group, for that matter) were not entitled to the right of self-determination and/or a nation state because it would lead to instability throughout the Middle East?

I’m not trying to be provocative or controversial here. I’m simply flipping the mirror to provide an analogy.

You then went on to declare that the key catalyst behind the Egyptian Revolution was food. Really? Just food?

I am sure many protesters were poor and could not afford to properly feed themselves and their families. However, it beats me how you failed to recognize that the real demands were for democracy, an end to oppression, poverty, inequality, etc. One of the slogans chanted by protesters was: “We can go hungry but live free.” As much as I hate to regurgitate, I feel obliged to inform you that educated, tech-savvy people formed the bulk of protesters. Manual labourers, lawyers, Christians, Muslims, children, and retirees—everyone protested. This was not a “food” revolution. It was a much-delayed demand for dignity.

The scariest part of your article is your view that democracy is not right for Middle Easterners based on the ongoing Afghan and Iraqi experiences. First, Afghanistan is not an Arab country (and most would argue that it is not a part of the Middle East), and so a comparison must be avoided. Second, in both cases “democracies” were imposed by outsiders based on the Western-liberal model. That does not sound like a successful formula to me. Third, democracies do not emerge overnight. Britain took over 700 years to get to where it is today. Fourth, democracy is a right that all humans are entitled to—courtesy of the UN’s Universal Declaration of Human Rights. You add insult to injury by claiming that what the protesters want is not democracy, but an end to corruption. It’s amazing how you know what the Egyptian people want better than they do. Have you communicated with even one protester? On what basis do you assume that the Muslim Brotherhood would simply revert to corruption if it comes to power? What is your basis for deciding who democracy is right for?

While you admit that your intent is not to be judgmental, your entire piece seems to be just that. As wary as I am of using the R word, the undertone in your writing seems to border on being racist.

In the future, I would highly recommend running drafts of your “Perspectives” by people with varying points of view. That way, you could have avoided writing the one Op-Ed that has provoked the largest number of negative comments on the Tribune’s website. You owe the McGill community, Egyptians, and all oppressed people around the world an apology for the nonsense you wrote.

Majd Al Khaldi is a U3 Honours Political Science & Economics student, and can be reached at [email protected].