Hans-Hermann Hoppe has written a wonderful set of essays, all captured in his book “Democracy - The god That Failed.” The Egyptians now get to experience the disappointment associated with the faith placed in this false god.
From Der Spiegel:
Egypt's presidential runoff election is pitting a former Mubarak associate against an Islamist. For many Egyptians, neither man is worthy of their vote. The country could face new unrest as a result.
In most if not all elections, the choices ultimately offered to the people is of two candidates, each of whom is not worthy of the vote.
Brothers Antar and Amgad used to be looking forward to taking part in a unique experiment. Proud Egypt, the most populous Arab country, was to become a democracy after decades of authoritarian rule.
Sadly, it is more likely that the Egyptians just ushered in a different form of authoritarian rule.
But now the Farids -- two amiable, slightly overweight gentlemen with moustaches -- are standing in their tiny shop feeling frustrated. It is hot and dry, and the tired-looking ceiling fan barely makes a difference, as flies buzz around the roasting machines. Like millions of other Egyptians, they feel cheated by their revolution.
Was this revolution ever about ensuring that the freedom and liberty of the people would be increased? Likely not.
They were appalled to witness two hardliners turn out to be the frontrunners in the first round of elections on May 23 and 24: Ahmed Shafiq, 70, a former air-force general and member of the former Mubarak regime; and Mohammed Mursi, a 60-year-old engineer and senior official from the conservative core of the Islamist Muslim Brotherhood. The Farids, like most people in their neighborhood, had voted for the left-wing candidate Hamdeen Sabahi.
"We now have a choice between someone who hates the revolution and someone who wants to introduce Sharia," says Amgad. "God have mercy upon us."
Likely both candidates are satisfactory to the West: on the one hand, a continuation of Mubarak, on the other hand a candidate likely to present a good “enemy” for the West, to be used as justification for further interventions. Unfortunately, at least for these two brothers, neither candidate is a good choice. But elections are rarely about offering a good choice to the people.
The two brothers will probably vote for former military man Shafiq in this weekend's runoff election. He is the lesser of two evils, says Antar, who has a small crucifix tattooed on his right arm. The Farids are Copts, members of Egypt's largest Christian minority. The Islamists' long-term plans are dangerous, says Amgad.
Voting for “…the lesser of two evils.” Don’t worry, Antar. Many Americans, after more than two-hundred years of worshipping this false god, gladly vote based on this criterion. Perhaps your children or grand-children will learn to embrace this, as many Americans have. My guess is not – you do not seem to have any misplaced faith in your politicians, therefor you likely will not pass along this mental defect to your children.
Antar and Amgad are Coptic Christians. It is interesting to note: whatever evils the various Middle Eastern rulers carried out, for the most part the minority communities, to include the Christian minorities, were relatively safe. To the extent they were persecuted, it was because of political activism against the regime and not because of their faith. This was true in Iraq, where today the Christian minority is decimated. It is true in Iran. It is true in Egypt, but these brothers fear it will not continue. If the West has its way, this disaster will come to the Christians of Syria next.
The two brothers are beginning to fear democracy, as they are in the minority. They are learning that minorities always lose when it comes to the outcome of popular democratic elections. As the saying goes, democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting for what is for dinner.
They will also learn that eventually the majority also loses when it comes to democracy. As another saying goes, democracy is the false belief that you and your wife have more political pull than someone named Rockefeller.
Wait a minute, you say. How can the minority lose and the majority lose? Certainly someone must win at this game, else why is it played. Yes, someone certainly does.