Abstract
Starting from the empirical distinction between ‘discontented’ and
‘dispossessed’ created by processes of accumulation by dispossession necessary
for neoliberalism to succeed, this paper suggests how the broader historical–
geographical framework developed by David Harvey helps us make sense of
the 2011 Egyptian revolution. The paper focuses on the underlying tension
between the ever more frequent encroachments of ‘the molecular processes of
capital accumulation in space and time’ within the political sphere and the persisting
relevance of forms of territorial government and governance for the success
of capital accumulation itself. This seeming contradiction allows us to
account both for the penetration of neoliberalism in Egypt and for the different
forms of hybridisation and domestication that accompanied it. It suggests that,
by looking at the social consequences of neoliberalism, one can see a sharp
class polarisation, with the emergence of both a private capitalist oligarchy and
embryonic forms of alliance between the dispossessed and the discontented,
which had a central role in the 2011 revolution. This perspective also permits
us to go beyond the dominant liberal narrative of the Arab Spring focusing on
demands for freedom (horreya) and democracy (dimuqratya), recovering the
neglected yet vital dimension of social justice (‘adala igtimaya).
‘dispossessed’ created by processes of accumulation by dispossession necessary
for neoliberalism to succeed, this paper suggests how the broader historical–
geographical framework developed by David Harvey helps us make sense of
the 2011 Egyptian revolution. The paper focuses on the underlying tension
between the ever more frequent encroachments of ‘the molecular processes of
capital accumulation in space and time’ within the political sphere and the persisting
relevance of forms of territorial government and governance for the success
of capital accumulation itself. This seeming contradiction allows us to
account both for the penetration of neoliberalism in Egypt and for the different
forms of hybridisation and domestication that accompanied it. It suggests that,
by looking at the social consequences of neoliberalism, one can see a sharp
class polarisation, with the emergence of both a private capitalist oligarchy and
embryonic forms of alliance between the dispossessed and the discontented,
which had a central role in the 2011 revolution. This perspective also permits
us to go beyond the dominant liberal narrative of the Arab Spring focusing on
demands for freedom (horreya) and democracy (dimuqratya), recovering the
neglected yet vital dimension of social justice (‘adala igtimaya).
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 423-440 |
| Number of pages | 18 |
| Journal | Third World Quarterly (London |
| Volume | 34 |
| Issue number | 3 |
| Early online date | 24 May 2013 |
| DOIs | |
| Publication status | Published - 2013 |