That a revolution, as yet undefeated, may succeed

The forces that called for Egypt's 25 January Revolution and the 30 June revolt are by no means homogenous. But do successful revolutions require homogenous revolutionaries?

By Wael Gamal , Tuesday 2 Jul 2013
Ahram Online

".....The swelling popular momentum and its contingencies have shown that the revolution will continue its programme of abolishing the existing system, a programme that many have courted now for nearly two and a half years.  

The remarkable effectiveness of youth initiatives, a myriad of which have hiccupped to a halt before fruition, have sprung on a stifled political climate that is full of resentment. The January revolution has not yet realised a single success, with the exception of the ouster of Mubarak and a few of his men, and the dissolution of his ruling party.

In the meantime, the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF) and, following on their heels, the Brotherhood, took care to reproduce the old regime, politically, economically and in the security services.

These reproductions were carefully tailored to prevent the translation of changes in the balance of social and political forces (at the hands of millions of ordinary people breaking into the world of politics) into actual authority. Not even one basic reform of the wage system, the redistribution of wealth, or corruption has been realised. The police have undergone no reforms whatsoever, and the security apparatus' grip on society is as tight as ever. 
And the poor continue, above all others, to shoulder the deterioration of economic conditions resulting from the insistence of the new rulers on making policy in accordance with the seasoned monopolistic interests that control them. .....

The alternative scenario is of the variety that does not accommodate rulers, or their epigones who provoke political battles through jasmine tea sessions or missions knocking on the doors of Washington. Its calculus resides in practice: a mass and massive ascent that does not content itself with mobilisation in the squares, but rather struggles against the rulers in their economic authority through the general strike.

It is a blitz made possible only through open, clear and visible confrontation against the alliances that work on reproducing the old regime in power, in any and all of its components, in competition or cooperation, from the Brotherhood, to the military, to the older remnants of the regime itself.

This blitz would be a blow. Its victory would open the door to a new politics and a new order whose institutions, ruling parties and prevailing democratic and organisational structures are created in the battle, and not before it, for the struggle conditions these structures, and not the opposite. 

Short of this assault, the June offering remains a pressure point whose importance lies in the size and significance of popular and broad-based mobilisation, and whose growth increasingly circumscribes the policies of the counter-revolution in both its wings.
It would be a pressure point that paves the way for another, forthcoming and inevitable battle, under a single banner representing our revolution: the people demand the downfall of the system."