What Does Anyone Want But To Feel A Little More Free?, Part II

An essay I read this week for a course about "global civil society" broadly placed movements within civil society into three categories, based on their relationship with globalization: those that support it, those that oppose it, and those that try to reform it from within. While reading about the political protests sweeping across Arab states, I've wondered which category these uprisings fall into, and think an argument could be made for all three. Globalization can be partly defined by promoting liberal, democratic governments, which is certainly what every protestor, from Algeria to Iran, is demanding. Yet global capitalism also produces greater income inequality, and thousands are in the street to oppose the capital networks so many countries have joined, largely to ruling families' and their friends' benefit. But then, many aspire to be part of an educated middle class, much like what fills Europe and the U.S. (and other parts of the world), so perhaps people want the economic growth but reformed regimes.

None of the Gulf states that have become the locus of 21st-century capital flows, largely because of oil, finance and/or real estate, have experienced the same protests so far. Perhaps this is because these states have so much wealth that it can be redistributed handsomely enough to citizens, migrant labor can't organize, and their emirs have in the past several years spent lots and lots of money on higher education, infrastructure and urban development, to support a more liberal culture. But should Qatar, Saudi Arabia or Abu Dhabi find itself in the same position as Egypt, I wonder how all of the U.S. universities who've spent lots of money and planted their reputation there will respond. Cynically, NYU et al are there because emirates have showered them with money to place their name on the university and because the partnership represents a good opportunity to expand their donor bases. Optimistically, they want to be part of the Middle East's liberalization. However, should these governments turn out to be even more repressive than suspected, their administrations' policy will start to look a lot like U.S. foreign policy in the region.

Finally, it's worth noting that the Times is now identifying by name its reporter and photographer in eastern Libya (but keeping its photographer in Tripoli anonymous). This is a strong sign that Qaddafi's regime will fall or the country will at least split in two. Kareem Fahim, the reporter, is one brave guy to carry around a notebook there. That one of the Sulzbergers died yesterday is worth noting in conjunction with this minutiae about reportage because the Times is only one of two U.S. newspapers that invests in this risky work. Think about this when choosing how to consume your news.

Thanks to Godspeed You! Black Emperor for the post's title, which has appeared in these pages before. Unfortunately, they're bypassing Boston on their reunion tour.