Thursday, April 24, 2014

Reflections on: Life as Politics How Ordinary People Change the Middle East


The main subject or focus of Life as Politics is simply the role of the sociopolitical activism in democratizing the Middle Eastern politics and society. That's to say, Asef Bayat explains: How the disenfranchised ordinary people, the non-movement actors, refashion the political dynamism in the Middle East. How they used to clamor for their rights through redress rather than protest. How those popular non-movements helped in instigating and mobilizing future grassroots movements and popular protests among the young generations.  In this frame of mind Bayat examines both  contentious politics and social ‎‎non-movements as key vehicles to produce meaningful change in the Middle East.

"Life as Politics'' is a scholarship composed of three sections subsequently treating points germane to the societal factors that shaped the political activism in the Middle east streets. The first section contains two chapters exhibiting the cultural artifacts of the political street which serves as a breeding ground for non-verbal mobilization and non-movements.  In a milieu which is replete with despotic agency and subjective citizenry,  those 'Ordinary People' find the public spaces as platforms to shed their inhibitions and verbalize their disappointment with the parlous conditions in which they live.  It varies from region to region. For instance, in Egypt, the most populous country in the region, the sociopolitical activism started taking shape at the hands of the subaltern groups. Disgruntled with their polity, they initiated movements to express their advocacy to democracy and opposition to the regime. Kifayah (i.e. Enough is Enough) was a movement that came to existence and to the fore with the advent of the new millennium ( circa 2004/5). Even though its major aim was to lash out at Mubarak rule rather than clamoring for fundamental change in Egypt, but nobody can downplay their role as a vital opposition movement.
Following their footsteps, a subsequence of grassroots movements led by educated, Middle-class youth took the helm of change which focused on labor rights, combating nepotism, favoritism and corruption, and speaking on behalf of the dispossessed, the poor and the deprived. Later on political activism and criticism became one of their hallmarks prior to the 2011/Revolt.  Albeit they started with a vague and trendy notions of change, dripped with youthful zeal,  yet their initiatives were like the muse that inspired the like-minded youth who started similar movements such as: the liberal April 6th Movement, the Islamist Ahrar Movement … etc., which used to be kept on the periphery by the regime.
The first section was concluded with mentioning the widely praised  '2002 the Arab Human Development Report' that reflects the analytical myopia of the western Orientalists and the Arab detractors who exhibited indifference towards the role of the non-governmental and non-movement actors. The Report calls upon the state-led edifice to start improving regional deficits in the civil rights, while it ignores, in tandem, the vested interests the power holders have in maintaining existing sociopolitical structures. Bayat brought the dichotomies of the 'Report' to point out that western pundits see the societal activism from the prism of the kind of mobilization geared towards achieving social or political gains that reflects the ossification of their thinking obviously exhibited in the Report that describes the contours of change as stagnant in the Middle East. Moreover, the Report overemphasizes the mendacity that the Middle East needs to import the western ways to bring about any desired transformation and reformation, that goes to the detriment of the idea of auto-change.
With this being said, Bayat conveys a message to the Western Orientalists, who drastically immersed themselves into the politics and society of the Middle East, stating that any change happened in the Middle East isn't brought about by western pressure or leverage, but it was surely a vintage of the grassroots movements of the disenfranchised, excluded and subaltern ordinary people. Declaring that the change is generally an endogenous process which is already underway in the Middle East.  " {…} The fact that President Mubarak of Egypt accepted in February 2005 to allow rival candidates to run against him in the presidential elections had less to do with western pressure than with a nascent but vocal Kifaya (“enough is enough”) movement, which instigated international momentum to bear on the Egyptian regime." Page 53)
Bayat argues that many Westerners who promote social change in the Middle East get it wrong by failing to comprehend the particular fluidity of the region’s people, social structures, movements, and cultures. (Ch. 1 & 4).
Running through the second section Bayat conceptualizes the ''Quiet encroachment of the ordinary'' and how it overcomes the long-standing idea of popular politics stagnation. Bayat argues that ''Quiet encroachment" is political non-movements which {…} refers to the collective actions of non-collective actors; they embody shared practices of large numbers of ordinary people whose fragmented but similar activities trigger much social change, even though these practices are rarely guided by an ideology or recognizable leaderships and organizations." (Pgs. 14)
Disillusioned with any foreseeable change from the part of the elitist polity, the ordinary people have recourse to encroaching on the propertied, the powerful and the gentry of their societies by occupying the public utilities where the elitist habitués regularly patronize, hawking in the rich neighborhoods, pitching kiosks on street  pavements and suchlike.  By taking such atomized and placid actions of encroachment, they think they are redistributing and participating in marshalling their resources in alignment with the upper echelons of their society. Bayat notes, ''{…} What do these men and women aim for? They seem to pursue two major goals. The first is the redistribution of social goods and opportunities in the form of the (unlawful and direct) acquisition of collective consumption (land, shelter, piped water, electricity, roads), public space (street pavements, intersections, street parking places), opportunities (favorable business conditions, locations, labels, licenses), and other life- chances essential for survival and acceptable standards of living.'' (pgs. 59).
The bottom line is It wouldn't be an overstatement to say the subaltern politics of the ordinary is complex to the extent of its ability of spawning vital transformations to state of affairs. Though it is dispersed, atomized, episodic and divided, Bayat stresses it is the perfect foil for the organized, collective politics. There are myriad of examples embody the subaltern politics billed as the ''Art of presence'' (Ch.1). As I noted three of them above, I can subsume the following as well: Reconciling between tradition and modern life, like Muslim women who create new fashions of head-scarf that jibe with their personal preferences (Ch. 5). Reconciling between religion and fun like the youth who transcends the cultural barriers and do practices considered antithetical to their cultural and religious values (Ch. 6). Also Bayat brings up a major factor of the formation the subaltern non-movement politics (one of the strengths of Life as Politics) namely, cosmopolitan coexistence quoting Egypt as a case, " {…} For instance, Muslims and Coptic Christians in Cairo experience an intertwined culture, shared lives, and inseparable histories" (Ch. 10), and this to name a few. Bayat sees that those factors are tantamount to being the good omen of bringing about democratic transformations as the political and cultural ' autonomy'  to be wrested from the existing authorities. The book holds true as it contains bleak prophecies of Arab revolts against the rentier and autocratic class, which came true with outset of the year 2011.  
In conclusion, Bayat wonders in the Ch. 9 if Islamism, with its multifarious incarnates in the Middle East states, has its own expressed voice and ecology within the scopes of the masses. He sees that political Islam voiced disapproval of the urban ecology as it spawned many victims of impoverished slums, and created class divisions in society. Political Islam uses the poor interests and concerns as its foremost plank in mobilization. The despotic neo-liberal or secularist regimes in the Middle East find it inimical to its existence and power longevity. Bayat posits that Islamism is the only movement that confronts the invincible power holders. It is the counterbalance that revelsin mass popularity and acceptance within the Middle East states.  {Ch,8, Pgs 171})
Life as politics has lots of strengths. First and foremost, it was written by a sociologist who firsthand studied the cases mentioned as examples in the book which was full of prophecies that hold water later on. Second, its outstanding strength, tackling the issues of the ''encroachment of ordinary which was the molecule of foreseeable moblizational movements within the popular, young and women spectrums.  Third, the grassroots democracy in the Middle East is the perfect foil to show the inadequacy of the west in addressing the democratic development of the Middle East. In other words, the book criticizes the skin-deep reports and conclusions enshrined in the widely praised 2002 Arab Report which reflect the mistaken and superficial understanding of the Middle East particularly with the advent of the new millennium.  Last but not least, the book is following brand new methodology and approach to the issues of clashes between the ideologies and its impact on galvanizing popular activism: e.g. the clash between the nostalgic fundamentalist/radical Islamism and neo-liberal despotic systems of beliefs. It tells us that both ideology is the antithesis of the other, that is impossible to be a substitute for the other. 
I also have some critical points to make. Bayat’s conceptualization of  'non-movements'  as an instigator of political change is provoking, but also problematic. I think that non-movement do not necessarily lead to democratic consolidation or fostering equity in society. It is a kind of alleviating the plight of the excluded, disenfranchised majority by reconfiguration of the means of provision dominated by just few people in their society (i.e. a royal family, elitist clique, popularist couriers…etc).
In conclusion, Bayat was very successful in presenting a close-up image about the ordinary non-collective activism by following a meticulous historical context with the acumen of a sociologist who firsthand reports a narrative which is an outcome of a hands-on study. His book is not merely trying to tell us the reason why Middle Eastern states revolted in 2011, or what might come next, although his insightful analysis helps answer both questions. His real aim is to diagnose the symptoms of period of stagnation and purposelessness that might precede a period of awakening and forward-looking (exactly happened). Therefore, I agree with this insightful  analysis ''Life as Politics" which is written in a clear and accessible prose whetting the appetite of the readers to peruse it. 

Mohamed Arabi, an Egyptian Political Writer , American University, Washington D.C.

No comments:

Post a Comment