a comment on an article by Nathan Brown about Egyptian constitution

 Dear Mr. Nathan Brown,

The question you raised about "the 2012 constitution largely writtenby decried terrorists", is actually a remarkable question.

Although I think that this constitution is un-amendable, it contains numerous fatal mistakes, not to mention the week wording and phrasing. But I disagree about your conclusion, that the regime will present a constitution much like the last ones, with a formal democratic face.

I totally agree with you about their efforts to institute for the current arrangement of power, and I am admitting they may succeed in that phase, but then they wouldn't get away with it, as Morsi didn't.

You see the Egyptian people have very little knowledge about constitution, non of the eight constitutions drafted by Egypt was rejected, they think of it as a document to tell what the administration can do, rather than a document to tell what it cannot do. Or they don't regard it as a document that creates a government that would be powerful enough to protect them, but not powerful enough to oppress them.

Constitution or no constitution, the Egyptian people will, at the end, judge the administration by its deeds, as they did with the last two administrations.

What did really happen in both revolutions, is what was explained by Hamilton and I quote

“In a society under the form of which the stronger faction can readily unite and oppress the weaker, anarchy may as truly be said to reign as in a state of nature, where the weaker individual is not secured against the violence of the stronger”

In both cases the weaker faction was the intellectuals who were out-populated, but managed to accumulate enough power to remove their oppressors, strangely enough they now hold the balance of power in the nation.