Share
Over the past few months, I have been asking friends, family and acquaintances whether they would rather live in Egypt or Iran. I asked them to reconsider the question based on their gender and economic status. The answer was almost always Egypt.
Yet, Iran is more economically developed than Egypt. It has about twice the per capita GDP and spends two to three times as much on health care per capita. An Iranian is more likely to have household access to electricity, piped water and indoor plumbing than an Egyptian — this is especially true for a poor Iranian.
Egypt is more equal in terms of income and student academic achievement. It also has slightly more freedom with respect to civil liberties than Iran, according to Freedom House, but the same level of restriction in political rights. Some also argue that women’s rights are better in Egypt. Both countries suffer from high unemployment rates, especially for those in their late teens and twenties. Both have large public sectors and restrictive governments, in which women are repressed.
When compared to developed countries, both are very poor and quite far behind the West in political, educational and economic freedom. But people in both countries are fighting for improvements. And since they are important players in U.S. foreign relations (Egypt is a large recipient of U.S. foreign aid; Iran is a recipient of ire), the West should keep a close eye on the movements.
In Egypt, the fight is visible and dramatic. Tired of poor living conditions, inequality and unresponsiveness, Egyptians staged protests last year, culminating in revolution. This movement was costly, however, hurting tourism and infrastructure, slowing the economy, and leading to many deaths and much disorder.
Unfortunately, despite the revolution, it is unclear whether Egypt will transition to democracy. There is a risk the same political institutions will stay in place, and Egypt’s new rulers will be similar to the old. There is also a risk the new rulers may institute changes so radical they lead to a conservative backlash and coup.
In Iran, the fight is hidden and slow. Young men are becoming more open to treating their wives as equals. Women in Tehran dye their hair bright, attractive colors to test boundaries and irritate morality police. President Ahmadinejad clashes with Ayatollah Khamenei over progressive reforms. Female activists work to extract concessions on divorce and family law. Filmmakers portray divorce, infidelity, class divides and failings of the justice system in their movies.
A version of this article appeared in the Jan 24 issue of the Collegiate Times.
Leave a comment 3 Comments Write a letter to the editor
All letters to the editor must include a name, e-mail, daytime phone number and affiliation to Virginia Tech. Affiliation includes: year and major for students; position and department for faculty and staff; current city for alumni and parents.
My question is given that Iran is in violation of the UN's nuclear non-proliferation treaty, doesn't that require sanctions against Iran? Letting Iran build a nuclear weapon weakens supranational institutions and send to a message to other countries that they need not comply with binding treaties.
Reply to this Top
Here are some reasons Islam and democracy are incompatible.
• Inimical to 'social freedoms', demanding that all people obey their 7th century moral codes without question or criticism, under penalty of death.
• Inimical to 'man made' laws, claiming that their laws are given to them by God/Allah and all must obey them, in submission, under penalty of death.
• Inimical to the 'social contract' that is democratic constitutional government, for the people and by the people, in pursuit of 'life, liberty, and happiness', as these are 'man made' ideas, and to submit to them over Allah's laws is apostasy, punishable by death.
• Inimical to the 'rights of individuals' to pursue their own ideals and beliefs, freedom of worship, freedom of inquiry of truth, freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of artistic expression, freedom of loving other human beings, freedom of choice, freedom of pursuing one's life with reciprocal respect for others regardless of race, religion, or ethnicity, or sex, as these are our 'inalienable' rights; to pursue these may be punishable by death.
Reply to this Top
• Inimical to 'democratic freedoms' as protected by (man made) constitutional laws agreed upon by social contract to protect the rights of individuals, but in favor of 'dictatorship' politics supported by the Ulama with the ultimate goal of imposing a universal Caliphate dictating all society according to (Allah/Mohammad's) Sharia, where submissive obedience is rigorously mandatory, under penalty of death.
• Inimical to intellectual 'secularism' in all its forms, in education, in philosophical inquiry and discourse, in the sciences, in religious studies, in history studies, in sociological studies, in anthropological studies, in archeology studies, if these are not in concordance with the 'religious' teachings of the Koran, except as studies of 'infidel' societies to be subdued, conquered for conversion, to pay the jizyah, or be put to death.
• Inimical to social 'equality' of all human beings, especially of the female sex, women kept in oppression as chattel for procreation and sexual gratification of males; as submissively obedient house slaves in violation of the sanctity of their personal humanity, unfree to seek life as they desire but must live in fear of their male masters who will punish them if they disobey, for violating their 'honor', with death.
Reply to this Top