Egypt: No Black Swan this

In his widely acclaimed book, ‘’The Black Swan: The Impact of the Highly Improbable’’, the epistemologist and former Wall Street Trader, Nassim Nicholas Taleb focuses on the extreme impact of certain kinds of rare and unpredictable events (outliers) and humans’ tendency to find simplistic explanations for these events retrospectively. This theory has since become known as the Black Swan Theory.

What happened in Egypt on July 02, 2013 has been widely reported and commented upon. Various analysts and commentators have analysed this event in their own ways. From calling it a battle between Islamists and secularists, to an uprising by the Egyptian youth who were increasingly frustrated at the high unemployment rates prevalent in the country to the death of nascent democracy in Egypt.  High inflation and political chaos have also been attributed as reasons for this ouster, encashed by an Army which was waiting in the wings. And when it involves an event of such magnitude, especially in the Arab world, how could conspiracy theories not be a part of the discourse. So the usual suspects like the US and Jewish lobbies have been blamed for Mr Morsis’s ouster. What has been hardly discussed is the role of the Saudi backed Salafi Al-Nour Party, Muslim Brotherhood’s erstwhile allies, in this whole sordid episode.

Having said that, I would not like to delve too much into these reasons, for they have been discussed threadbare and writing more of the same wouldn’t serve any tangible purpose. I started with a reference to the Black Swan events and what defines a black swan event. In terms of its predictability, the events of last week in Egypt were not unexpected, at all. So in terms of its predictability, it wasn’t a Black Swan event. It was not definitely among the outliers on a bell curve. Many analysts have tried to portray it as an unexpected event, but that is lazy analysis and is like merely trying to focus on the symptoms and not the disease. For the genesis of this disease, we need to look elsewhere. A walk down the memory lane, a revisit of Muslim history and its criss crossing with medieval and modern Europe needs to be looked into.

Muslims bear the burden of history. A burden that cannot be easily shrugged off. The study of history is fascinating and if done critically, can lead to a mindset that is transformational, not merely transactional. A walk through Muslim history, especially of its earliest periods is like walking through a minefield. It is intertwined with theology and so one needs to be careful while sifting through it. Parts of early Islamic history have been censured, partly due to political considerations and partly due to rigid and extreme religious thought. Instead Muslims have been mostly presented with a sanitized version of history, so that a Muslim can always fall back upon a partly imagined glorious past, as an escape from the harsh realities of his present. A time when Muslims, being more than a billion in number, hardly count in the global scene.

The nature of the Islamic State went under a huge transformation, in a matter of a few decades from the time of the earliest Muslims. From a State formed on the basis of consultation, it was transformed into an absolute monarchy. This change, in many ways, lead to the disintegration which the Muslims witnessed subsequently, which continues till this date. Religion can connect people broadly together, but it is a tangible social contract that builds nations together. It can’t fructify merely on the basis of religion. The social and cultural milieu cannot be discarded altogether. The formation of a State and its longevity and stability also depends upon strong institution building. It is various organs of the State that have to function in harmony to avoid any turmoil and instability. And in this scheme of things, the role and place of religion in an individual’s life and whether or not the State should play any part in this, needs to be properly discussed and defined.

So where essentially have the Muslims faltered in nation building over the course of history? The root of the problem lies in the fact that Muslims have taken the concept of nation building to the garage and tinkered with it, so much so that there is no general consensus among Muslims even over the most basic process of running a state i.e the process of electing the Ruler. The ascendency of Yazeed to the throne, which marked the beginning of the establishment of monarchy among Muslims, set the stage for subsequent bloodshed among two major Muslim dynasties, Umayyad and Abbasids for control of the Muslim State. With the beginning of monarchy, any question about the conduct of the King began to be seen as a direct challenge to the authority of the State, and was dealt with forcefully. With accountability of the ruling class gone, no meaningful evolution of State could be expected.

Muslims have ruled over vast Empires over the course of history and at times have ruled over parallel kingdoms at the same time. The concept of the Brotherhood among Muslims, though talked frequently, has hardly ever been put into practice. Given these facts, the need to fudge history, and present a more sanitized and even distorted version of history became even more important for the extremist religious people. This approach of oversimplification of complex issues has also lead to gradual prevalence of fanaticism in Muslim religious thought which is driven primarily by the pursuit of a utopian ‘’perfect Islamic state’’. Any consideration for changed times or societies is viewed negatively and often as  heresy.

A society is as good or as bad as the people who constitute it. It is merely wishful thinking that just by bringing in a set of rules, the society will change for the good. No rules can work effectively, in isolation, unless the mass of people forming a society make positive contributions in the world around them. We live in a global village, where the actions of people are immediately transmitted in real time across the globe. Unless the Muslims, by and large become positive contributors to the society, without worrying too much about the real and perceived external enemies, the events that we witnessed in Egypt would repeat.

It would be in place here to compare the miserable condition of Muslims with Europe of the Middle Ages and how it successfully came out of the darkness that had consumed it. The most defining moment of Europe, coming out of the middle ages is how it redefined the role of the Church. It took a long time for Europe to come out of the shadow of the Church, but it navigated its transition very successfully. Martin Luther challenged the role of the Church and tried to reform it. Because of this, Christianity was split but it speeded up the process of Renaissance in Europe, which helped it to become a dominant power on the world stage. Questioning dogma and authority gave rise to new avenues and vistas of knowledge. Religion was not completely rejected, but was bypassed. New Universities and centres of learning began to come up. More people began to take to science, which was once denounced by the Catholic Church. Science and Religion were in a way, limited to their own spheres of action, without one interfering with the working of the other. This was really path breaking since it lead to new discoveries in the field of medicine, technology, defence, automobiles, communication etc. The world was really transformed.

Compared to this, the debate in the Muslim world is still archaic. No serious thought is put into improving the condition of Muslims in the here and now. Listening to a preacher from his pulpit or even from the comforts of his TV studio gives one a fair idea of how Muslims are still removed from the realities of the world. There is no debate about contemporary issues. The torch of knowledge has long passed from the hands of Muslims. The lights have almost completely dimmed. It is utter darkness everywhere in the Muslim lands. Sloth has almost become an obsession with Muslims worldwide. The world has come a long way from the days of the big empires. For Muslims to stage a comeback on the global scene, egalitarianism has to return as the mode of statecraft. Dogma has to give way to the spirit of enquiry and the clergy’s role needs to be curtailed.

The Muslim world lags behind the West by almost 400-500 years. For this gap to be closed, a mere call to an Islamic State, will serve no purpose. It needs a complete overhaul of the Muslim mindset. Rhetoric cannot substitute for substance. The slogan of a Model Islamic State looks attractive on the drawing board. But irrespective of the nomenclature, unless Muslims devise a proper political, social and economic road map, this will remain nothing more than utopia.

It is not just about Egypt or Muslim Brotherhood or Mr Morsi. It is about the whole Muslim world. Today it is Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. Tomorrow it will be some other party in some other part of the Muslim world. But unless Muslims critically examine their history, shed the distortions that have crept in, stop painting a rosy picture of the past and draw the right inferences from history, the events of July2 will repeat. They will not count as Black Swan events, given the predictability of the unpredictability of the Muslim World.

Tariq Jameel, a Kashmiri based in Bangalore, is an investment professional with interest in history, politics and sports.

Follow this link to join our WhatsApp group: Join Now

MONTHLY	Rs 100
YEARLY	Rs 1000
LIFETIME	Rs 10000

CLICK FOR DETAILS