Why do we care about Alaa more than Maikel?
Issandr El AmraniThere's a good post up at Bikya Misr asking that question:
CAIRO: A total of no more than 15 people showed up on Tuesday November 1 outside C28 to show their support for Maikel Nabil. Of the 15 were a couple of Maikel’s own family members and AlJazeera crew, which essentially dwindles the numbers down to about 11 protesters.
It’s Maikel’s 70th day on hunger strike, but clearly it didn’t concern many.
Having just attended a march the previous night to free Alaa Abdel Fattah, where thousands by thousands had joined, I frankly expected the people’s fuel had finally caught fire. Judging by the turnout that Tuesday however, I was mistaken and disheartened.
It’s difficult to point out why many have such a passive attitude towards Maikel’s case in particular. We claim to seek ‘freedom of speech’, no government censorship and the liberty to express ourselves. Yet where there is an opposing viewpoint we have a tendency to create boundaries – where is the freedom in that?
Try having a conversation with a colleague or a friend in attempt to define freedom of speech, more often than not people will say ‘I do believe in freedom of speech but …’ and wind up giving you exceptions such as it’s okay to say anything as long as it’s not ‘culturally insensitive’. As such, they subconsciously set limits on others freedom to express. The more conscious we become of it, the more we will be able to avoid it.
Personally, I say it bluntly and simply, I don’t agree with Maikel’s campaign “No to compulsory Service” and I’m against his pro-Israeli views. I would assume a lot of Egyptians would share a similar stance on the latter. Regardless of my justification for these views I still feel the need to act based on principle and humanity. Maikel has been accused of supposedly ‘insulting’ the military council in one of his blog posts and not for the ideas that have made him unpopular, which is a misconception I’ve been hearing frequently. And so, the way I see it supporting Maikel’s case has become synonymous with being a believer in freedom of speech.
I know why I care more about Alaa: because I know him. And for many Alaa is simply better-known, and associated with the anti-Mubarak, pro-democracy movement since 2005 at least. He's also a better communicator.
But at the same time it's true that the Maikel Nabil case does not get nearly as much attention. Part of it is that Maikel's initial reputation was built around his pro-Israel views, and his refusal to be drafted into military service because he doesn't want to harm Israel (as well as advice on draft-dodging). It's not just that many Egyptians have anti-Israel views, but it's also that Mikael's view is perplexing when you consider he defends a civil, secular state and human rights more generally: after all, Israel is hardly a great example of separation of religion and state.
Should any of this matter? I don't think so — at the end of the day, Mikael is the victim of a system of oppression that has sent some 12,000 to military tribunals, reduced freedom of expression and does not allow certain views — including being pro-Israel — from being expressed. And for that, he deserves support.
Reader Comments (5)
And this is one of the symptoms of our movement, which clearly indicates why it is weak, that is lack of principles. Principles are not to be forsaken for preferences of personal reasons, as they are values. Actually,I believe Mikail has been a better soldier in terms of sacrifice and steadiness. Alaa for me is too soft and he does not express radical views at all. He is a nice guy, but this festival of support made me distance myself from any support to this type of hype that surrounds the NOMilTrials. It is not the first time that people are mobilized for famous figures, but not for the ordinary revolutionaries. What a shame.
People believe in free speech right up until that speech makes them feel uncomfortable - insulted or outraged that someone might not believe what they do or whatever. The fact is, the specifics of Maikel's speech are of no consequence to people who believe in free speech. But most people don't. They just say they do in an attempt to come off fair or liberal-minded or to score points on their own agendas. It makes me terribly sad.
His blatant support for Israel signed the death warrant of him ever getting any support/ solidarity from Egyptian activists. Not that I agree with this, but am sure he knew this.
Maybe he sees Israel as an example of a state which manages to draw from it's rich religious tradition and yet put a boundary in such a way that non religious can still feel free of any limitation.
Any democracy activist who supports an apartheid, and thus undemocratic, state is going to lose credibility in the eyes of the activistist community the world over, not just amoung Egyptians. Regardless though, we must champion his well-being and freedom.