StatueOfHoremhebAndTheGodHorus-DetailOfHoremheb01_KunsthistorischesMuseum_Nov13-10To initiate a new constitution for Egypt, there are numerous principles and joined but adequate environmental hands to join.

Look at it this way. Two thousand five hundred years ago Egypt was conquered first by Persians and then by the Greek. Ultimately it went through a series of conquerors from Romans to Arabs until it has come this point. Now, going back to an ancient system of government would be inadequate to meet the modern needs, and not wise because man has evolved to some degree, with all and the deepest respect for the ancients and all their wisdom.

So, as I see it, a constitution should reflect the traditions in the country, from the pharaohs to the Arabs, and try to put each tradition in a place, where the best qualities of each tradition is used and put to best practise in Egypt. All are good at something, and bad at other things. What we need to do is put each faction in a place where they do what they do best.

Now, according to Plato. There are three elements in a state. The king, the aristocracy and the people. In order to balance all these elements of society off, each have their designed place in the ruling of the country. The king is the president, the aristocracy is the upper house, and the people is the lower house. This is reflected most superbly in the American constitution, where they had the luck to start from scratch when they made their constitution, and consequently made a superb system of government that they still believe and fight for.

Therefor, to reflect the wish of the Americans, a three-tier government should be installed.

Now. The problem with Egypt right now is, that there is not a serious democratic culture. The culture should be encouraged and grown in the next three to four generations before it is a true Athenian/Babylonian democracy.

Therefor we need to build in the elements of organizations that is in Egypt already. There are three serious elements: The military, the conservative religions as Salafis, Muslim Brotherhood and Copts. And there are political parties as socialists and liberals.

These three converging elements of society should come together in a new constitution.

Now. To understand why we are implementing a Republic, one has to understand the mechanics of nature. According to Plato, there is a natural development in a society, that goes in a cyclical flow. The idea is originally from Mesopotamia and Babylon, so it is closely developed, and not a western idea actually.

It goes like this.

First a society is ruled by a king. He is then deposed by the aristocracy, because they are powerful enough. That happened in Egypt in the transition from the old kingdom to the middle kingdom. After that the people seizes power, because the aristocracy becomes too corrupt, that happened in the transition from the middle kingdom to the new kingdom in Egypt. And ultimately the people becomes so corrupt, that a tyrant will impose his will to “clean up” the society. That happened in the last days of the last free Egyptian society with many make-believe tyrants.

So, we need to mix all three elements of society to make a balance. Hence; king, aristocracy and people.

Now. To further the discussion, and sorry about the details in the debate, but they are important to understand the construction of the constitution, the problem or the balance of a society goes between two extreme points of view. That of freedom and that of ethics. Some are liberal some are conservative.

In order to make that balance. Both liberal and conservative elements should be present in the ruling of the country. They are often very much in disagreement, but the end result in the debates between the conservative and the liberal is a balanced society.

Now who are the liberal and who are the conservative in Egypt? The liberal are the people, and the conservative are the religions. As a consequence. The liberal should have a dominance in the lower house, and the conservative should have a dominance in the upper house.

In other words. Some mechanism to put the leaders of the Copts, the Salafis and the muslim brotherhood in the upper house, should be coined and planned. How it is done, and in a fair manner, is up to the involved partners. This is the first project group that should be commenced. A group that should discuss how and with what tools should the conservative upper house be constructed. Should it be able to coin laws or not? Should it be able to veto laws, how is the leaders elected and so on. Make it a fair procedure.

Secondly the lower house should be commenced. Here the liberal and the socialist and other political players should team up, and define a just and true system. The lower house is to put the will of the people in action. Now many politicians, especially here in Europe have forgotten the role of the politicians. They believe that they have some birthright to power. This is wrong, it is the other way around. The people have the birthright to power, not the politicians. So as a consequence politicians should see themselves as servants to the people. Hear the demands and set the demands of the people into action. This chamber should be powerful and should be able to make laws. There is a delicate relation between the upper and the lower house, but it should be a peaceful one, not a combative one. Make a lower house in the interest of Egypt, not of egoistic motives. For the betterment of Egypt.

Now. Thirdly, there is the president. The most powerful element of the three. I have reflected a lot upon this element, and a certain name has popped up in my head again and again. I always think that if something really press me when it comes to a prayed or a political text, it is a kind of message from spirit.

The name is Horemheb. Who was Horemheb? Horemheb was the last true great pharaoh. A giant of his time, and a just ruler, a military man and an impressive character. The last pharaoh of significance. I believe, that the presidency of Egypt should be molded around the character of Horemheb. How was he? First of all, he was a general before he became a pharaoh. So he had an intimate knowledge about the whereabouts of war and the mechanics of the military. He knew how to fight, and he was disciplined. Added to this his character was supreme, he ruled by example and not just by decree.

Study him, and the ideal of a true president should emerge for the studier. In the first phase, I believe the military should have the presidency, and should always present a candidate for the post. Do not be shy, it is in the tradition of Egypt to have a military man on the post. Also in The United States of America is this a tradition. Look at McCain, Kerry, George Bush, all great warriors.

Now, there are two, or three more elements to cover in a constitution. First, there is the system that protects and purports the rule of law. In this area there is one text I propose as a founding text. A Middle kingdom classic called the trial of the eloquent peasant. In this a small man of humble means is confronted in court with a larger man with a lot of resources. One would think that in an unjust society a small man would be at the prey of the larger man. But, he fights for his right, and in a crescendo of speech his proclaims that the ruling court should give him the benefit of the ruling, because he justifies his case as a true case. He says! Speak truth, honor truth, and understand truth and justice will prevail. This is the traditional role of an Egyptian system of law; to understand and honor truth, symbolized in the goddess of the scales, blindfolded.

Secondly there is the press. The press is a vital element of a modern state. Some call the press the fourth power in the state after the three elements of the ruling system. Why? Because the press is able to enlighten the ruling system. By a profound and honest quest for light, it will be able to prod the society in the right direction when it comes to transparency. This is more or less lost in Europe these days, where we are under the thumb of the Europeans Union, so here Egypt should not copy Europe, but copy United States of America, the last true stronghold of light. It all goes back to the French gendarmes. They made the first newspapers in the spirit of Voltaire, the Socratic philosopher. It is about the respect of the system towards critique. Critique is not a bad thing, but a vital source of renewal and adaptation to the shifting circumstances of the world.

Now, there is a new player in the enlightening game, it is called blogging. Blogging is a ventilation for critique as well. Often the good bloggers are the bloggers who are honest and works for the betterment of society. Good bloggers are the best weapons of the new generations. Listen to them, and protect them. They are often vilified and persecuted by the rest of the society, I speak out of personal experience.

Then there is one last element, I have been savoring to the last. The Muslim Brotherhood and the Copts are enemies, or there have been some tendencies in the respect. It is because the Muslim Brotherhood lost the power, because they could not make an adequate constitution. This fighting has to stop. Conflict and strife will lead to the destruction of Egypt, not to the construction of a modern and respected state. Stop it, and my motivation to join the construction of Egypt lies hundred percent in the protection of the Copts. If they are harmed, I will not help. Stop the killings and persecution, NOW!

The Muslim Brotherhood and the Christians should do something else, the thing they are best at; help the poor. The poor of Egypt are living under an extreme distress. They need help, and all who believe in spirit should start helping them instead of thinking of their own interests.

Why is there such a thing as religion? It is because the nation needs an organization to help it exist. A nation will only work if it is filled with honest men and women. This is the task of religion of all monotheistic religions; to underpin and make a base for the nation. In this case; the nation of Egypt.

G-d bless the wise and the willing.

Categories: Egypt, Politics Tags:
  1. Bucur
    July 18th, 2013 at 12:45 | #1

    I really don’t know how you got a king from Plato’s “Republic”. In fact, as in Ancient Athens, the society is ruled by the Aristocracy of Philosophers, which are the most educated and knowledgeable members of the society. Also, they are NOT allowed to accumulate wealth, for the sake of preventing corruption. In decadent societies, the military ensures the leadership – like in Sparta and today Egypt, or worse there is a democracy of common people that lack appropriate judgement so that this type of society decades even more in tyranny – as happened in Germany, when they elected Hitler as their leader, or was about to happen in today Egypt.

  2. Asger Trier Engberg
    July 18th, 2013 at 18:08 | #2

    Please read “The Republic” before you go into details about this.

  3. Asger Trier Engberg
    July 18th, 2013 at 18:20 | #3

    The principle is described there. Yes Plato was also inspired by Sparta, and there are many good ideas in the Spartan constitution. But the theories are not developed originally in Greece, but come from Mesopotamia. There were many citystates there; Ur (Where Abraham came from), Nineveh, Eridu, and of cause Babylon.

    Plato did not coin the idea, I have read about it in other philosophers works, so it was just the basic ideas of statehood known to the Greeks and before them the Mesopotamians.

    You can off cause discuss it, but I believe history has proven its seriousness.

    The trick about an Egyptian constitution, is to construe an architecture that takes into consideration Egyptian traditions and ideas. Egypt is home to monarchy. The pharaoh were monarchs. So in order to construe an architecture fitting Egypt, you have to take the best ideas and tradition of monarchy and add it to the Babylonian mold.

    Therefor I have prescribed a strong presidency, because this is the representative of the king.

    You can then off cause discuss the principle, but the balance off power represents the different groups of society, and this is exactly what Egypt needs now, not an oppressive part doing a lot of harm.

  4. Bucur
    July 18th, 2013 at 21:49 | #4

    I have read it, my friend, and the relevant phrase is:

    I said: ‘Until philosophers are kings, or the kings and princes of this
    world have the spirit and power of philosophy, and political greatness
    and wisdom meet in one, and those commoner natures who pursue either
    to the exclusion of the other are compelled to stand aside, cities
    will never have rest from their evils,–nor the human race, as I
    believe,–and then only will this our State have a possibility of life
    and behold the light of day.’

    @Asger Trier Engberg

  5. Bucur
    July 18th, 2013 at 21:53 | #5

    Some more, if you indulge:

    And so, Glaucon, we have arrived at the conclusion that in the perfect
    State wives and children are to be in common; and that all education
    and the pursuits of war and peace are also to be common, and the best
    philosophers and the bravest warriors are to be their kings?

    That, replied Glaucon, has been acknowledged.

    Yes, I said; and we have further acknowledged that the governors, when
    appointed themselves, will take their soldiers and place them in houses
    such as we were describing, which are common to all, and contain nothing
    private, or individual; and about their property, you remember what we

    Yes, I remember that no one was to have any of the ordinary possessions
    of mankind; they were to be warrior athletes and guardians, receiving
    from the other citizens, in lieu of annual payment, only their
    maintenance, and they were to take care of themselves and of the whole

  6. Asger Trier Engberg
    July 18th, 2013 at 22:22 | #6

    Exactly, these are the elements of Plato, that he has from Sparta. But you see, Plato was a collector of ideas. Plato means “The broad”. So just because he writes down how they figured things out in Sparta, does not mean he did not write down other principles. I do not have my library here, so I cannot quote the exact phrase. But, since writing a good book as a reflection on the Republic. I know what I am talking about. In fact, it is not so important where the principle is cited. You can find many other sources. What is important though is if it works. And here you can see all the parliaments made on the idea, that it works. Take the English, the American, the Danish. Basically it is political theory.

    An interesting thing about Plato is, that understanding Plato is difficult if you do not read “around him”. That is, read about his predecessors, the historical writers and so on. Plato is difficult, and it took me a while to really understand the elements that I find interesting, that is metaphysics and politics.

    But, again. All can interpret Plato, and have done since he lived.

    As an interesting thing, I have had the opportunety to read all there is about Plato, and around him. These days you can get so many books that were before unavailable. This gives the possibility to really read more than before. I am just reading about the advent of the European rennaessance. In Italy five hundred years ago just reading Plato was more or less the only source. Today we can read thycudides, Herodotus, Parmenides, Anaxagoras, Animaxander, and on and. This creates a possibility to make a new rennaesannce. Help me with this, and you are truly a Platonist 🙂

  7. Rene’ Descartes
    July 23rd, 2013 at 06:07 | #7

    You cannot get ahead by looking in the rear view mirror (Think Lots wife).
    Philosophy has evolved a lot since then. Philosophy is an invitation to think up a new and better way of life for all people, not only a select few as well as searching for wisdom. Mankind need answers to their problems now, not the answers from yesteryear. If you are enjoying Philosophy, think up new ways to make a better world now, instead of dabbling in the past mistakes and blunders. The horrendous system we live under truly needs improvement. Even anarchy looks better than what we have. What will be the next system, if any? Do we need a system at all? or has the consciousness of mankind as a whole evolved enough to do without a system? Plato was needed in his time to help mankind up the next step, but don’t get stuck on that low step, we are much higher up the ladder now. (:

  8. Asger Trier Engberg
    July 24th, 2013 at 15:33 | #8

    Hey there Rene, nice to hear from you, good to have your sincere and enlightening ideas here.

    I respectfully disagree. You see, as I have read through all the many philosophers. I see a much more refined and advanced collection of societies in the ancient Middle East and in Hellas/Rome.

    They were far ahead of us, and we are not gaining, on the contrary we are getting further and further away. Just take a look a art. If you compare Italian renaissance to what we have today, what do you prefere?

  1. No trackbacks yet.