3 ms·
> There is so much irony in that paragraph combined with the title The irony is more apparent when you read further in the article that the author received sup
by acqq 11y ago
> There is so much irony in that paragraph combined with the title
The irony is more apparent when you read further in the article that the author received support from the very same U.S. for his activity of making a democratic revolution. However he was just an "activist" and Muslim Brotherhood the "political force." Which developed exactly how it sounds, as he also describes.
My other comment here contains some more interesting quotes.
- Demiurge 11y agoIt's unfortunate hyperbolic use of 'revolution' has kind of muddied and made the term less relevant. A revolution should mean a fundamental change of political system, not change of political power. Going from monarchy to socialism is a revolution. Going from feudalism to democracy is a revolution. Egypt experienced a coup, not a democratic revolution.
- apalmer 11y agowhat happened in Egypt was a revolution, you are attaching additional meaning to the word that it really doesnt hold.
- Demiurge 11y agoObviously I commented because I think otherwise, based on my interest in history and semantics of the subject, I explained why. Just telling me I'm wrong hasn't changed my opinion, but thanks.
- marcosdumay 11y agoThe French Revolution brought the country from a monarchy to an empire - what are just two names for the same thing. I doubt anybody would claim the word "revolution" isn't suitable for it.
- Demiurge 11y agoThe French Revolution fundamentally changed the government institution, from monarchy to republic. Being an empire, as in, containing heterogeneous cultures or states is besides the point. The point is that the states might gain some legal rights.