Egypt

The world is watching Egypt as it takes to the streets demanding basic rights. I watched CNN's coverage of it last night and it seemed clear that they are hedging their bets as to the outcome. The interest is clear, they favour stability and by inference the status quo. While acknowledging that major change may be about to happen, they concentrate on looting, personal security and economic damage. The message is clearly spelt out that those with vested interests should be concerned and should support a return to the status quo if not to a compromise that retains significant components of the status quo.

There seems to be two distinct sides. Those that have nothing and are now galvanised that they can have more, and those that having something and worry that they could lose some of it. The haves therefore only back a revolution when it is clearly going to happen, as they risk loosing out if the exisitng power structure remains, regardless seemingly of the merits of the revolution.

The human rights oriented world lamented the situation in Egypt due to rights abuses. The property oriented world now laments the situation in Egypt due to property abuses. These two sides seem unable to communicate with one another at the required level to bring about a situation that is to their mutual satisfaction.

As more emphasis is put on the security situation, pressure is brought to bear on those that have property to loose, in the hope that support for the status quo will be increased. CNN being a hawkish company does not surprise, but what will likely be important to the outcome, is the influence of the hawks in international governments circles.

Property may not be theft, but it puts a brake on idealism.