‘Are liberals good enough’
I have no doubt about the sincerity of Hamas and ‘dedication’ of the spokespersons of the Muslim Brotherhood Bloc in Kuwait to defend and respond to anyone who tries to criticize them.
In response to our article in which we described those crying over Kuwait as ‘foxes’ and asked ‘who will fill the vacuum left by the Muslim Brotherhood after them’, I received four letters. Three of the letters said there will be no vacuum, because those elements are originally a bad plant and malignant tumor, so removing them today is better than tomorrow, indicating the harm they cause is indeed more than their usefulness. As for the fourth message, the questioner asked about the additions and benefits offered to their society by the liberals, democrats and secularists of Kuwait. In case they are given the chance to rule, will they engage those who disagree with them on administration or use those who agree with their views?
The answer is long but we will shorten it within the boundaries of this article. We will assume that the liberals, if they are true, have given nothing to their country! But is it reasonable to compare their bloc with the Muslim Brotherhood Bloc in Kuwait, not to talk of the rest of the parties and other religious groups? It is clear that the comparison here is unfair.
For more than half a century, the government has favored the Brotherhood and given them almost everything. The Brotherhood, for example, is a legitimately recognized institution having the right to collect and disburse money as wished, including spending on election campaigns for their representatives, establishing large companies and spending on their projects and assistants. Do liberals and secularists have such a luxury and the ability to collect money, without which they can’t do anything serious? Even if a group of liberals want to donate millions in support of the liberal movement, will the government allow them to do so without any legal framework? Who will pay the money, and who will manage it?
Therefore, it is impossible for liberals, democrats and secularists, if they gather, to do what the Muslim Brotherhood parties and predecessors do- especially as they do not work in the dark. They cannot work in broad daylight without a recognized party or an association through which they can drive politics, raise funds and support their candidates to achieve their goals and objectives.
The second question as regards the extent to which liberals and democrats can engage others, if allowed to rule, is an improper question in its composition. The question of who governs who has been dealt with constitutionally. More accurately, the answer to the question of ‘the extent at which they can use their opponents in any political or economic activities’ depend on the reality on ground.
I personally have dozens of employees from different sects who are bearded and very religious. Nevertheless, do business interests of the Muslim Brotherhood, for example, have a tenth of what many others and I have in terms of freedom to act, love for others and not being biased against others due to their religion or sect? Extremists, even the corrupt religious ones, write in the newspapers typified by liberalism, but the publications of religious parties do not allow liberals to even think about writing!
The real liberal or secular remains hostage to his ethics and principles and represents the opposite, in my opinion, to the other party. Please do not compare; it is not an apple in exchange for another!
I return to the first paragraph of the article, saying I understand very well the reasons for the ferocious defense of the Brotherhood and their party by members, and this surprises some people, but they would have stopped wondering if they knew it’s all in the achievements of a few members of the Brotherhood who amassed enormous wealth. This is not for the fame of their products, efficiency of their offices, beauty of their designs or strength of their equipment, but for the ferocity of their threats, misuse of political influence, pressure on the ministers, exploitation of their deputies, and threats of questioning and other unethical means.
The names of those who have achieved great wealth from the Muslim Brotherhood, in many countries, are known. Most of them have chosen to enjoy what they have achieved, but others are still “afraid” of asking for more- bound by the feelings of the dictator who feels he must fight until the last breath in defending himself and his party. They will come one day to hold him accountable and ask: Where did you get this, if he surrenders voluntarily or due to weakness?
By Ahmad Al-Sarraf