For those used to a mainly
western way of life, it is difficult to fathom the effects of living in an
undemocratic society. But
surprisingly, that is exactly what millions of people in the Arab world do
every day, culminating these days in violent protests and diatribe filled with
anger. People are upset throughout
much of the Arab world about their standards of living and government, and do
not seem ill-at-ease in either showing it blatantly, or in blaming it on
others—usually the United States.
It is almost shameful how little economic opportunity there is in much
of the Arab world, and what effects this is having on its residents. It is as if leading Arabs have reached
a point where forward roads are difficult to see, sideways is not an option
when progress is wanted, and going backwards is simply out of the question.
So much of the
protesters today in the Arab world want democracy like no other. They want freedom and they want
sovereignty. They want a
government that is fair and that is responsive to the needs of the people. It is not that these things are
impossible for the Arab world to handle; instead, this author believes it is a
matter of the governments not serving the needs of the people. There is little way for Arabs to get
ahead in many countries and they are blaming this on the government when they
are at their very best, in a variety of unorganized and ineffective attempts at
democracy.
Part of the
problem in finding hegemony in many unrestive Arab countries is in the vast
panoply of interpretations of Islam found there. Rarely does a country subscribe to only one school of
Islam. And since before the Arab
Spring, it seems, the world has been met with new emerging groups and parties
trying to wrest control of their countries from others there. It is civil war after civil war. And while some of the more successful
factions seem “saner” than others, and may have at least some idea on how to
run their countries, many citizens do not believe these groups because their
interpretation of Islam may be different.
This makes agreement on a leader virtually impossible in the highly
religious countries because the position is too sensationalized and prejudiced,
and does not take into consideration the actual sociological makeup of the
country. And this is causing
problems.
For things to run
smoothly in so many Arab countries and decrease factionalism within the nations
themselves, leadership needs to implement more social programs to be used by
the citizens of the countries they represent. Programs like welfare, jobs programs, government royalty
programs/tax rebates, educational programs—all these are programs which have
shown time and time again to make people more agreeable to what their
government has to offer. These are
programs which highlight democracy in these countries, and which give people a
chance to succeed they might not have without the gentle hand of
government. And I believe if Arabs
could rightfully trust their governments to have their interests instead of
just those of a small religious group, they may have much better luck in
finding rulers that are productive for their countries, and not just
rhetoric-filled figureheads, as many of them are.
People need faith
in their government. In what is
now the time that so many Arab governments are attaining new levels of
leadership and diplomacy, there need to be ways now more than ever to remember
the good that government does and can do.
Arabs need to have more reasons to be proud of their respective
countries for what they offer them.
They need to feel they are included, and not to feel the need to find
outlets in other places to vent their frustrations. They need a friend in government, and freedoms; not tyranny,
money-hording, and repression. For
many Arab countries the option should be a sociological one. And for the violence to stop, we
definitely have to see something different.
