Why do Arab rulers fear intellectuals!! | A homeland tweeting outside the flock


The thorny and complex relationship will never be resolved in “our Arab world” between the debate of the intellectual and the Arab regimes, where the intellectual has suffered for decades from the marginalization of the role of the intellectual in society. Its power and firm grip. Why fear of some intellectuals? It chases them here and there, robs them of their freedoms, and prevents many from their right to live in peace within their countries, in addition to marginalizing their roles in society.

Many of them turned their backs on the history and era in which they live and did not engage with the problems of contemporary reality and social life, and many thinkers and philosophers criticized the model of the “prophetic intellectual” that the French philosopher writer Lucien Pinda spoke about, as well as the French philosopher Jean-Paul Sartre, and considered this “treason” Intellectuals” as stated in the title of his famous writing..

Who is the real intellectual?

The true intellectual is not the one who read books, collected information, obtained the highest degrees, and lived separate from the problems of reality and society, but in its precise meaning, the person who lives the issues of his society and his era with deep understanding and ability to criticize and analyze, and has the courage to tell the truth, and seeks to improve conditions This means that the work of the intellectual is “descriptive and descriptive” in his analysis and dissection with objectivity and integrity of what is in the present and in reality, and it is also a “normative” work in his criticism of what is in the light of what it should be, and in its quest to make what it should be. To be the object, in fact, in his homeland, society and age.

Thus, the field of work of the intellectual is different from the field of work of the politician and the statesman, because the field of work of the intellectual is to defend what should be, and draw its features, based on criticism and analysis of what is, as opposed to the field of work and goal of the politician, which is always defending what is , beautify it, promote it, and devote its presence.

However, a normal society, and a system of government that seeks development and progress, must establish a space for communication, dialogue and interaction between the field of work of the national intellectual (and what it should be) and the field of work of the politician and the national statesman (what is), and the embodiment of identity between them, because they Together, they are a foundation for the progress of society and the state. The (national) intellectual possesses historical, imagination, and political thought and awareness.

The (national) statesman possesses the will, the tools of power and the realistic vision that enables him to make what he should be the actual object, but according to the circumstances and the available capabilities.

In 2005, at the Cairo International Book Fair, in a famous dialogue with “intellectuals and writers,” a raging conflict between “President Mubarak and Dr. Mohamed El-Sayed El-Saeed,” where Dr. Mohamed called on President Mubarak for a new constitution that does not make power absolute in the hands of the president. Mubarak’s response was not correct.

I do not have absolute powers.. the government does most of the needs..” Dr. Mohamed El-Sayed Saeed said: “I think Yaris, this is not absolutely true either.

Read also: Sudan is under a hot plate of coups!!

If we go back to the 1971 constitution, there is no such thing as a government. There is a head of state assisted by a ministerial system. The Council of Ministers has no constitutional entity. A broader term is the executive branch.

Dr. Muhammad al-Sayyid Saeed says that this point passed and he completed his words: “We do not want absolute rule. We want a strong parliament, strong unions, and freedom to have constitutional protection.

And you are complaining that “you can’t find ministers” and this is a phenomenon called “the shrinking of the political elite” in the political field. It occurs because the channels of participation at all levels are closed. We do not have real parties, real unions, or real civil associations. Therefore, a constitution must open closed channels. And be the real protection for Egypt. We will have an elite that has emerged from the community, knows it well, and embraces its ambitions and hopes. This was the essence of the words of the intellectual (Mohamed Al-Sayyid Saeed), who felt that meeting the president does not mean raising demands, but declaring a clear position that does not lack courage or a sense of true rivalry with the president.

The president described Dr. Muhammad al-Sayed Saeed as extremism when he said before leaving: “You don’t waste your thoughts on the country.” Those who demand reform want to go back to before 1952 AD, when a government was formed every “six months.” Do you want this situation? Dr. “Mohamed El-Sayed Said” replied, O President, the problem before 1952 was not in the democratic constitution, but in the coup against the democratic constitution. We have seen about (7 constitutional coups) in Egypt, and this is the secret of the problem of instability before 1952 AD.

The intellectual, Muhammad al-Sayyid Saeed, did not consider meeting the president a gift, an honor, or an opportunity to smile and photograph next to the person in authority, but he saw it as an occasion to announce a complete point of view that the president does not usually hear, because the entourage of every sultan and those close to the president’s ear usually only say what he likes Or they can slander him. He stood innocently and spoke bravely in the presence of the majestic presidential ego. He demanded a new constitution and told him about the perversions of his regime, including the insult to the dignity of the citizen. He wanted to give him a paper bearing concepts for a new constitution. The ruler only said, “You are an extremist and I understand better than you.” And this paper Put it in your pocket, and President Mubarak did not understand that Dr. Muhammad is a “liberal leftist, not an extremist.” Dr. Muhammad al-Sayed was always described as a left-wing thinker, but he described himself as “a liberal among the leftists, and a leftist among the liberals.”

A conscious intellectual, a graduate of the Faculty of Economics and Political Science, fiercely defended thousands of Sinai residents when they were arrested and tortured after the Taba bombings. He lived away from the manifestations and love of power, thinking with his national conscience away from pulpit sermons, and he did not do this just for the sake of patriotic trading in this position and others, but rather, based on his belief in the role of the active intellectual despite being subjected to brutal torture in 1989 following his solidarity with the strike of iron and steel workers. The history of my struggle since he was a high school student in 1968, when he participated in the student demonstrations. He was arrested. At the age of 59, after a struggle with illness, he passed away in October 2009. The problem of the ongoing conflict between the two parties, and working to achieve a truce, even if temporary, through which we listen to the opinion of this and that, to be assured of the future situation between their non-shaking hands. The former stakeholders are aware of it, and it lies in the fear of some regimes from the intellectuals. All matters are on the table, and no one is afraid of anyone anymore, but the fear lies in permanence. The future, and some politicians are aware of this idea, but they do not realize its danger, because they do not read.”!!

The intellectual, the politician, and the talk of the deaf

Mohamed Saad Abdel Latif

An Egyptian writer, researcher in political geography, and a working member of the General Syndicate of Press and Media

Follow our YouTube channel to see all the new

Click here and hit the subscribe button

Follow us via Google news