The Jasmine Revolution in Tunis, which led to the overthrow of Ben Ali’s regime, has fomented dissent in Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Algeria and Libya. Unfortunately, it will not spread out to Morocco because there is not any viable alternative to the king's power and the corrupted bureaucratic government. Should the regime be toppled, the Moroccan population will certainly fail to foster a smooth transition to democracy because it is highly uneducated.
This is the consequence of the previous king’s iron fist rule. Hassan II deliberately launched a policy of “illiteracy”. After the March 1965 strikes and demonstrations led by high school students and teachers, the za’im (great leader) declared that “[t]here is no danger for the state as grave as the so-called intellectual. It would be better if you were all illiterate.”
From Hassan II’s early age, Moroccans’ future was set. The king wrote his Masters’ thesis about realism in politics and dealt with “The Prince” of Machiavelli. This fundamental book of politics and international relations contends that, in order to be respected and ensure the regime’s stability, a prince has to spread fear among his population and should not fear to be disliked.
What are the results?
After years of such policies, Moroccan people’s mind has been shaped to be obedient and subservient to the kingdom. Moroccan proverbs underline this state of mind. We often hear that “an unjust government is better than bad citizens” or “starve your dog and it will follow you” or “the stick is the only thing that will prevent rebellion and dissidence.” Moroccan sociologist Muhammad Guessous illustrates Moroccan politics with the following saying: “if you are going to be eaten, let yourself be eaten; but if you can eat others, then eat them…” Moroccan politics is embedded in Hobbes’ conception of human nature: Moroccans believe that they need a strong ruler in order to avoid chaos.
Today, Morocco has the lowest literacy rate of the whole Arab world. There is a brain drain because the kingdom does not provide any incentive to young people who studied abroad to move back to Morocco. As for those who do not have the chance to emigrate, they either pass away in the Mediterranean sea, trying to reach Europe’s door in Spain. Or they are too disillusioned to bring any change. There is only a small minority among the population who is angry enough to promote reforms or a revolution the way it occurred in Tunisia and is happening in Egypt.
What is utterly striking is that, despite wide socio-economic gaps, high rates of poverty and unemployment, Moroccans love the king and the monarchy. I had the opportunity to discuss lately these issues with a Moroccan teacher of classical Arabic in Casablanca. He took pride of the fact Moroccans are different from other Arabs, as he believed. According to him, Morocco's king is a strong leader because he has the title of the "Commander of the faithful" and, thus, gets his authority from God. Hence, the Moroccan regime is more legitimate than any other Arab states. His idea was that we oust presidents. Not kings. Though he was well-informed about the Algerian civil war, which opposed the government and Islamic groups in the 1990s, he proved to be blind to the social situation in his country. As for Tunisia, he pointed out that the Moroccan economy would benefit from a tourism increase because the tourists who fled Tunis would certainly come to Morocco.
In the end, this only proves that, among all Arabs, Moroccans are not the most stable but the least aware of the tremendous benefit of democracy.
This is the consequence of the previous king’s iron fist rule. Hassan II deliberately launched a policy of “illiteracy”. After the March 1965 strikes and demonstrations led by high school students and teachers, the za’im (great leader) declared that “[t]here is no danger for the state as grave as the so-called intellectual. It would be better if you were all illiterate.”
From Hassan II’s early age, Moroccans’ future was set. The king wrote his Masters’ thesis about realism in politics and dealt with “The Prince” of Machiavelli. This fundamental book of politics and international relations contends that, in order to be respected and ensure the regime’s stability, a prince has to spread fear among his population and should not fear to be disliked.
What are the results?
After years of such policies, Moroccan people’s mind has been shaped to be obedient and subservient to the kingdom. Moroccan proverbs underline this state of mind. We often hear that “an unjust government is better than bad citizens” or “starve your dog and it will follow you” or “the stick is the only thing that will prevent rebellion and dissidence.” Moroccan sociologist Muhammad Guessous illustrates Moroccan politics with the following saying: “if you are going to be eaten, let yourself be eaten; but if you can eat others, then eat them…” Moroccan politics is embedded in Hobbes’ conception of human nature: Moroccans believe that they need a strong ruler in order to avoid chaos.
Today, Morocco has the lowest literacy rate of the whole Arab world. There is a brain drain because the kingdom does not provide any incentive to young people who studied abroad to move back to Morocco. As for those who do not have the chance to emigrate, they either pass away in the Mediterranean sea, trying to reach Europe’s door in Spain. Or they are too disillusioned to bring any change. There is only a small minority among the population who is angry enough to promote reforms or a revolution the way it occurred in Tunisia and is happening in Egypt.
What is utterly striking is that, despite wide socio-economic gaps, high rates of poverty and unemployment, Moroccans love the king and the monarchy. I had the opportunity to discuss lately these issues with a Moroccan teacher of classical Arabic in Casablanca. He took pride of the fact Moroccans are different from other Arabs, as he believed. According to him, Morocco's king is a strong leader because he has the title of the "Commander of the faithful" and, thus, gets his authority from God. Hence, the Moroccan regime is more legitimate than any other Arab states. His idea was that we oust presidents. Not kings. Though he was well-informed about the Algerian civil war, which opposed the government and Islamic groups in the 1990s, he proved to be blind to the social situation in his country. As for Tunisia, he pointed out that the Moroccan economy would benefit from a tourism increase because the tourists who fled Tunis would certainly come to Morocco.
In the end, this only proves that, among all Arabs, Moroccans are not the most stable but the least aware of the tremendous benefit of democracy.
I strongly disagree with you about some facts while I agree with some.
ReplyDeleteAmongst many questions raised by reading your post, don't you think that 'sometimes' people
are responsible for their future.If you want my point of view, people who studied abroad
and go back home, their only priority is to get rich as soon as possible and if the corruption/theft are the only solutions, who cares ? thousand of people are doing it.
just some thoughts, nice blog btw
What do you strongly disagree with? I am interested in constructive criticism.
ReplyDeleteI do agree with what you wrote. But you are talking about thousands who benefit from the corrupted system. How about the millions of Moroccans remaining?
To illustrate what I wrote, this is a Facebook post that one of my friends published:
Zin alabidin bn ali =========> Game Over
Hossny mobarak ========>Loading
Boutfli9a ==========> Next stage
M3amer al9edafi ============> Mission impossible
♥ Mohamed VI ♥ ===========> Error system... cuz WE LOVE our king ♥