Criticism of the saying, "Eastern tyranny" in our country

time ago; I gathered a meeting with one of the western researchers specialized in the field of democratic transition on the sidelines of a scientific conference in the American capital, Washington. There was talk among us about the reasons for the failure of the Arab revolutions, and the inability of the Arab countries to achieve a successful democratic transition, similar to what happened in other geographical regions such as Latin America, Eastern Europe and Africa.

And after a debate about the nature of the structural factors that contribute to the establishment of tyranny in the Arab region, such as oppression, poverty, ignorance and Western support for authoritarian regimes; This researcher was concerned to say that tyranny is something rooted and authentic in Arab culture, and therefore it is difficult to change or escape from it.

After our friend received the criticism and comment he deserved for his clear Orientalist observation, which implied in it the saying of "Eastern tyranny", which is frequently echoed about the inevitability of the Arab peoples falling under tyranny, and tends to neglect to explain a complex issue such as tyranny; I went back to thinking about our friend’s statement and whether it was true or not.

I remembered this incident as I was preparing for one of my lectures on the roots of tyranny and its production mechanisms. It was noticeable that the saying "Eastern tyranny" has its roots in one of the most important political philosophers since the dawn of history, and it is "Aristotle" who believes that tyranny is inherent in the East because the Asian people (which he describes as barbarians) tend to inherently tyranny "because they are slaves by nature"; He says.

In this regard, Aristotle says that "the barbarians are more submissive by their nature than the Greeks, and the Asians are more submissive than the Europeans, and from here they tolerate authoritarian rule without protest ... These properties are similar to tyranny, but their conditions are stable because they are hereditary and legitimate."

It is the same idea that has been repeated and transmitted from one philosophical generation to another, and even on the tongues of those considered by some to be the most important theoreticians of democracy in the West, such as the French thinker Montesquieu (1689-1755), who has the theory of "separation of powers", and who sees "Eastern tyranny" as destiny It is difficult to break from it, as the authoritarian ruler relies on religion to justify his rule, which for him is “the rule of ignorance: the ignorance of the tyrant himself, and the ignorance of his subjects, and hence the complete absence of every virtue.” He also sees that the princes of the East “always indulged heavily in fluidity and lust” .

The same idea moved from Aristotle to the author of the dialectical reasoning that sanctifies reason, which is Hegel (1770-1831) who holds that authoritarian rule is the natural system of government for the East based on patriarchal patriarchy. Whereas, the eastern system is based on the principle of one free person, who is the ruler who exercises his rule in the manner of the father with his children, and that he has rights that cannot be opposed because he is the father of all, and his obedience is an imperative duty.

According to Hegel; The oriental people "have only the worst feelings for themselves, for it was created only to drag the Emperor's car, and this is its inevitable destiny, their customs, traditions and daily behavior indicate the small amount of respect they have for themselves as human beings." This is how Hegel, the father of mental materialist philosophy, sees the East and its people.

It is also the same idea adopted by Karl Marx in what he called "the Asian production pattern." The researcher, Zahid Farid Mubarak, succeeded in tracing the origins of the idea of ​​eastern tyranny in his important book, "The Origins of Arab Tyranny", indicating the roots of the idea and its development from Aristotle to the present day.

Returning to the dialogue with our friend, the Western scholar; We find that it is undeniable that the Arab region remains the last region of the world to democratize. But the issue is not related to the Arabs ’unwillingness to be free from tyranny, or a“ natural ”tendency within them to tyranny, or that their culture, religion, and customs prefer tyranny to freedom.

The uprisings, revolutions and protests we have witnessed - and we are still witnessing - calling for freedom and freedom from tyranny in more than half of the Arab countries over the past decade; It affirms that there is a real demand for freedom and for the desire to end tyranny.

And whenever some people mistakenly believe - like our friend - that the Arab revolutions and uprisings have ended - especially after what happened in Egypt, Syria, Yemen and Libya - they are surprised by new protests and uprisings in other parts of the Arab world, as happened a while ago in Sudan, Algeria, Lebanon and Iraq, while some called it the second wave For the Arab Spring.

While our friend - and those like him - ignores his country's continued support for authoritarian regimes, which seems to guarantee the abortion of all attempts to liberate tyranny. Take the cases of Egypt, Syria and Algeria, which are the three countries that witnessed revolutions and uprisings at various stages during the past three decades. But its uprisings were aborted and turned on by a political alliance between authoritarian regimes and the West.

In Egypt, the West could not call what happened on July 3, 2003 a coup, although it is beyond doubt. He even supported - and still is - a regime that subsequently jumped to power and practiced all kinds of repression and abuse of political opponents.

As for Syria; Without Russia's military support for the regime there, Bashar al-Assad would not remain in power to this day. The same applies to Algeria. Had it not been for France's alliance with the military in the early 1990s and its encouragement of their coup against the results of the 1991 legislative elections, Algeria would not have entered into a bloody civil war that would have cost millions.

This does not mean categorically blaming the West alone for the tragedy of tyranny in our countries. Rather, it basically means that the "Eastern tyranny" sayings - adopted by our companions and like-minded scholars and researchers - are nothing but an escape from the truth, and a naive justification for the continued support of their governments to Arab tyrants.