Political instability in Tunisia.

[Ludicus]

These days, ordinary citizens of Tunisia took to the streets of Tunisian capital on demanding the country's constitution be respected and parliament reinstated, on the seventh anniversary of the Tunisian revolution. The protest comes amid a deep political crisis in Tunisia. The Ennahda, a moderate islamist party, has been the most powerful party in Tunisia since the 2011 revolution that led to the removal of Ben Ali, and has played a key role in backing successive coalition governments.
Tunisia: President Kais Saied declares he will rule by decree

[Heathen Hammer]

The party and its leaders have taken very hostile positions against homosexuality. In 2012, Samir Dilou, then minister of human rights and leader of Ennahda, said the LGBT people have no right to free speech, and they should respect the religion and heritage of Tunisia, he also said that homosexuality is a sexual perversion and that it's a mental illness.^[84]Amnesty International said that it was deeply disappointed by the comments of Dilou, especially that he's responsible for the respect of human rights.^[85]The presidential candidate of Ennahda in 2019, Abdelfattah Mourou, stated that homosexuality is a personal choice and that we must respected individual freedoms, but at the same time he said that he announced his support for the continue of criminalization of homosexuality in Tunisia, where sodomy is criminalized by 3 years of imprisonment.^[86]
In 2021, Fathi Layouni, Ennahda mayor of Le Kram, declared to a local radio station that the natural place for homosexuals is either prisons or psychiatric hospitals and that they are forbidden from entering his city, he also demanded the closure of the Association Shams, which is a Tunisian organization for LGBT rights.^[87]

Very moderate! So Secular!

[Lord Thesaurian]

Ludicus is right. It’s clear these so-called “democratic” protestors are really just paid Anglo American agents. The West needs to learn it must stop trying to promote “democratic” imperialism abroad [insert irrelevant reference to 19th century literature here]. Don’t be misled by Nazi libertarian warmongers who think democratic efforts in Tunisia are remotely legitimate. The US even admitted they hoped the revolution would serve as an example and catalyst for the entire Middle East, which just goes to show Saudi Arabia/USA/Israel were behind it, like they are behind everything that happens there. The “revolution” was a NATO false flag op. The Taliban are the rightful rulers of Tunisia. This is just a common sense, unbiased perspective.

[Ludicus]

To those who haven't read the entire post.My post was accidentally truncated, I think. The reason for mentioning what is happening in Tunisia was to ask H.H. if there have never been democratic aspirations or democratic ideals in any non-Western country with Islamic populations.
The Arab Spring, which began in 2010 in Tunisia, was driven by social networks and led to the fall of three dictators.
Any comparison between the Arab Spring and the situation in Afghanistan is nonsense. Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban when it was invaded by the US, and it is still ruled by the Taliban after the US withdrawal that failed to establish a democracy by force of arms. At most, for a brief period, a simulacrum of democracy.
My original question still stands, and H.H's answer is that it is not possible, because Islam is incompatible with democracy

The US even admitted they hoped the revolution would serve as an example and catalyst for the entire Middle East,

Don't say... Arab Spring: when the US needed to step up, it stood back

It would be easy to say that the US should not have intervened in the Arab Spring...The problem with these arguments is that the US was already involved – not least in terms of bolstering the very regimes the uprising sought to bring down....But when the US did intervene, it did so only out of self-interest. This meant policies concerned with regional stability and not democracy.

[Lord Thesaurian]

To those who haven't read the entire post.My post was accidentally truncated, I think. The reason for mentioning what is happening in Tunisia was to ask H.H. if there have never been democratic aspirations or democratic ideals in any non-Western country with Islamic populations.
The Arab Spring, which began in 2010 in Tunisia, was driven by social networks and led to the fall of three dictators.
Any comparison between the Arab Spring and the situation in Afghanistan is nonsense. Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban when it was invaded by the US, and it is still ruled by the Taliban after the US withdrawal that failed to establish a democracy by force of arms. At most, for a brief period, a simulacrum of democracy.
My original question still stands, and H.H's answer is that it is not possible, because Islam is incompatible with democracy

I don’t know why you’d take issue with his position given you’ve made the same point about “cultural incompatibility” with democracy, and even cited a famous segregationist to justify it. Unlike the newly liberated paradise of Afghanistan, the democratic Tunisian government is illegitimate because it is supported by the US, propped up by hundreds of millions of dollars in aid, loan guarantees, capital funds, governmental support, military training, external debt repayment assistance, as well as advisers from the US government. According to WikiLeaks, the Tunisian Revolution was secretly the work of the US, just like the US intervened on behalf of the Northern Alliance to topple the Taliban. Like the former Afghan democracy, Tunisia is officially a major non-NATO ally of the US, and just signed a ten year agreement for the US military to operate in Tunisia in support of government forces to help fight terrorism. US troops have already been unofficially active in Tunisia since 2014, assisting the Tunisian government.

The embattled Tunisian government was put in place and sustained with the support of US imperialists and wouldn’t survive without it as the country nears civil war. Ten years of support with nothing to show for it. Besides, everyone knows Tunisian democracy can’t be real, since as you rightly said, Middle Eastern countries are “civilizationally backward, premodern societies” with incompatible “cultural habits.” Not to worry though, an affiliate group of Taliban ally Al Quaeda is fighting hard to liberate their countrymen from the US puppet regime. All they want to do is make Tunisia more like Taliban-controlled Afghanistan.

[antaeus]

I think the idea of "cultural incompatibility of ideas" to be somewhat anachronistic to our understanding of how cultural change occurs.

Christianity could also be considered somewhat incompatible with democratic values. Any religion that has a set of rules that are provided by a deity or their representatives as absolute and irrefutable, rather than assembled through public process could be considered incompatible with democracy at any moment in time.

It is only through centuries of rationalisation that Christian countries have come to find themselves as democracies in the modern sense, and even then it isn't without issues. This process of rationalisation between competing ideas on governance could occur anywhere, in any cultural context. It just requires time for democratic values to mesh with local culture and time for traditions to evolve - this isn't something that can be forced to happen fast. So in our current world, we see countries with strong Christian heritages such as Venezuela or Colombia or Ukraine suffering difficulties achieving real democracy - especially when the process is mixed up with localised issues like poverty and corruption and competing ethnic identities.

The issues with specifically Muslim countries achieving democracy are no different to any others. It needs generations for a rationalisation to occur - alongside progress on other issues that undermine democracy - such as poverty, corruption, irrational ethnic division etc.

In this specific case (Tunisia), a government that has at it's heart achieved legitimacy through the financial or military aid of a foreign power is going to take time to balance - for the ideas of democracy to enmesh with the local culture - but it can happen. All modern democracies were ruled by absolute monarchies at some point - most of whom justified their rule through divine right. If it is possible for the decedents of feudal European kingdoms to craft the Declaration of Independence and rationalise it while practicing similar religions to the heavenly anointed absolute rulers of their allied French and Spanish, and the Republican rulers of their Dutch allies... then it's certainly possible for those of Muslim background to reconcile democracy within their belief system, or as repeatedly happened in Christian countries... reinterpret what the words in their religious texts mean within the new context.

But like any process of change... it isn't easy, and will take time. Because there will be people who have a vested interest in the old ways. Be they absolutist, or in old interpretations of religious texts, or old corruptions or old ethnic conflicts. Unless we round those people up and export or kill them... a change process will always be one of multi-generational struggle.

[Heathen Hammer]

To those who haven't read the entire post.My post was accidentally truncated, I think. The reason for mentioning what is happening in Tunisia was to ask H.H. if there have never been democratic aspirations or democratic ideals in any non-Western country with Islamic populations.
The Arab Spring, which began in 2010 in Tunisia, was driven by social networks and led to the fall of three dictators.
Any comparison between the Arab Spring and the situation in Afghanistan is nonsense. Afghanistan was ruled by the Taliban when it was invaded by the US, and it is still ruled by the Taliban after the US withdrawal that failed to establish a democracy by force of arms. At most, for a brief period, a simulacrum of democracy.
My original question still stands, and H.H's answer is that it is not possible, because Islam is incompatible with democracy

Well, no.
I don't believe that representative democracy is a viable system altogether. As experience of both Roman republic as well as contemporary Western ones, such systems do not last long and devolve into authoritarian kleptocratic oligarchies, while politicians themselves are essentially Manchurian candidates whose existence is inconsequential. In fact, Western democracy has existed for barely a few centuries and is already in its "final form".
I do believe, however, that direct democracy can work, although even that can only work in isolated high-trust societies.
Having said that, if such conditions are granted, it could work in Islamic society, problem is that you wouldn't like the outcome since populations of such countries do not share your values, as was easily proven by your other post's infatuation with Western myth about Iran and Afghanistan being "western" in 1970s, proving that such insight lacks fundamental understanding of the context (it being that Westernized population was a marginal minority limited to big cities). Majority of population in such societies is very religiously fundamentalist and is extremely social conservative. I do believe nonetheless, that they should get to decide how to run their countries, just like everybody else. The psychotic globalist idea that World needs a policeman that will tell other states what to do is downright tyrannical and will threatens not only developing nations that don't want to fall under globalist yoke, but humanity itself.

[antaeus]

Direct democracy in the age of social media.

Let me get my pitchfork. I'm sure I left it somewhere next to my burning torch.

[Heathen Hammer]

Direct Democracy would work most excellently in the age of high rate of exchange of information. It would certainly be more effective then corrupt oligarchy that most of the West is under now.

[Ludicus]

Well, no...I don't believe that representative democracy is a viable system altogether.

To conclude, Islam is incompatible with democracy. The answer is here, #10 (Thread "Secularism in the Middle East")

[Heathen Hammer]

To conclude, Islam is incompatible with democracy. The answer is here, #10 (Thread "Secularism in the Middle East")

There is no link between the part of my post that you quoted and your "conclusion".

[Ludicus]

Straight to the point: is Islam incompatible with democracy? yes or no?
---

Unlike the newly liberated paradise of Afghanistan, the democratic Tunisian governmentis illegitimate because it is supported by the US.

Nonsense.It doesn't seem to be a legitimate government because it has suspended democratic governance. Saied gave himself the power to rule by decree two months after sacking the prime minister, suspending parliament, and assuming executive authority.
------
Mass protest as Tunisia political crisis escalates - Al Jazeera

...Middle Eastern countries are “civilizationally backward, premodern societies”

Right now, Afghanistan is a tribal, pre-modern society, a permanent hostility exists between Afghanistan's ethnic communities. especially between the Pushtuns in the south and the non-Pushtuns (Uzbeks, Tajiks, Hazaras and others) elsewhere. All societies evolve naturally.Sooner or later, this will happen in the Afghanistan or plutocratic Saudi Arabia. Who knows.
But the American-led democratization effort in Afghanistan was flawed from the beginning. The US set up a centralized presidential system and "democratically" selected Hamid Karzai for President, and did not did not oversee a process allowing Afghans to freely choose.

Most scholars agree that US efforts to export democracy by force have been generally been negligible, counterproductive. Democracy must be built on foundations of popular sovereignty and the freedom of peoples to determine their future, it cannot be coercively imposed by outsiders from Mars or from the US.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Nonsense.It doesn't seem to be a legitimate government because it has suspended democratic governance. Saied gave himself the power to rule by decree two months after sacking the prime minister, suspending parliament, and assuming executive authority.

So, the Taliban is illegitimate because it militarily conquered and dissolved democratic governance? Make up your mind. The US backed regime change in Tunisia and the democratic Tunisian government like it backed the Afghan one, including militarily, which is why you claimed the latter was illegitimate. It’s obvious you either did not know and don’t want to admit it, or you simply make no attempt at rhetorical or intellectual consistency.

Right now, Afghanistan is a tribal, pre-modern society, a permanent hostility exists between Afghanistan's ethnic communities.

The same can be said of Tunisia:

This working paper provides a detailed insight into arms trafficking and extremism in Tunisia, discussing the country’s principle security challenges. It argues that there are deep divisions between tribes and clans in Tunisia, as well as between coastal elites and ‘disenchanted’ youths from the interior and under-privileged urban neighbourhoods. It goes on to argue that these divisions have resulted in violent protests, which could develop into armed conflict if grievances and divisions are not addressed.

https://www.smallarmssurvey.org/site...n-the-Edge.pdf

The US set up a centralized presidential system and "democratically" selected Hamid Karzai for President, and did not did not oversee a process allowing Afghans to freely choose.

This is a blatant fabrication. Karzai defeated 22 other candidates to become the first democratically elected leader of Afghanistan, carrying 21 of 34 provinces. Afghan parliamentary races saw voter turnout similar to US Congressional elections.

Most scholars agree that US efforts to export democracy by force have been generally been negligible, counterproductive.

“Most scholars” probably don’t say that because it’s empirically incorrect. Four of the top ten economies in the world by GDP are former authoritarian states or were conquered by authoritarian states within the last century, and all four developed into democracies as a result of the US military winning regime change wars against those authoritarian states. Nearly all democratic countries exist within the umbrella of current and former Anglo-American hegemony. That’s no accident, and no other countries in modern history can lay claim to such an achievement. Moreover, US military presence abroad is proven to have net positive economic impacts that turn negative if the US military withdraws.

U.S. overseas security commitments have a positive, statistically significant effect on U.S. bilateral trade. Doubling U.S. security treaties would expand U.S. bilateral trade by an estimated 34 percent, and doubling U.S. troop commitments overseas would expand such trade by up to 15 percent.

Trade losses from a 50-percent retrenchment in overseas commitments would reduce U.S. trade in goods and services by approximately $577 billion per year. This reduction in trade would likely reduce U.S. gross domestic product by $490 billion per year.

The economic losses from retrenchment are conservatively estimated to be more than three times any potential gains.

https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB9912.html

[Ludicus]

So, the Taliban is illegitimate because it militarily conquered and dissolved democratic governance? Make up your mind.

You are confused, aren't you? Afghanistan was under US military occupation,the US selected Kazai for President, and as I said before, did not did not oversee a process allowing Afghans to freely choose (how can someone choose freely when his country is occupied?). Tunisia isn't under US military occupation, its a free country where democracy was suspended.

US urges Tunisia's Saied to return to 'democratic path' after coup

Tunisia should swiftly return to its "democratic path," a top White House official on Saturday told President Kais Saied, days after a coup that saw the country's parliament suspended.

...Ennahdha played a vital role in the Tunisian legislature after the 2011 revolution, which inspired the Arab Spring uprisings across the region. Four more lawmakers were detained earlier Friday, and a judge was placed under house arrest.

Democracy in action, Over 100 Ennahdha members resign amid Tunisia's political

More than 100 prominent members of Tunisia’s Ennahdha party have resigned in protest against the leadership’s performance, denouncing its inability to form a united front against what they see as President Kais Saied’s attempt to stage a coup.

[Lord Thesaurian]

You are confused, aren't you?

I’m confused why you’re so determined to repeat debunked lies, like this:

Afghanistan was under US military occupation,the US selected Kazai for President, and as I said before, did not did not oversee a process allowing Afghans to freely choose (how can someone choose freely when his country is occupied?)

Tunisia isn't under US military occupation, its a free country where democracy was suspended.

Afghanistan wasn’t under US military occupation either. It was present with the consent of the democratically elected government, as in Tunisia. That hasn’t stopped you from lying about it. As I said, US troops have been in Tunisia for several years now, and the government has formally agreed to cooperate even more closely with the US military, just like the Afghan one did. All you’ve done is expose your own sophistry because you didn’t know or didn’t care that Tunisia is militarily and economically backed by the US, like Afghanistan was. In fact, there was far greater international backing for US military operations in Afghanistan than in Tunisia, yet here you are praising US-backed Tunisian democracy after falsely declaring Afghan democracy illegitimate because it was backed by the US. The Tunisian terror group Ansar al-Sharia is even a declared affiliate of Al Qaeda, longtime ally of the Taliban.

The United States has maintained a military presence in Tunisia for at least four-and-a-half years, rendering it unlikely that the events of Mount Semmama were an isolated incident limited to a mere advisory role, as the AFRICOM spokesperson claimed.

https://nationalinterest.org/blog/mi...-tunisia-31492

According to you, that would make any elected government since 2013-2014 illegitimate.

U.S., Tunisia Sign Road Map for Defense Cooperation

The road map took two years to negotiate, and it is a clear-eyed look at the relationship and suggests ways to close capability gaps. "We both want to improve [Tunisia's] military capabilities and training to improve [U.S. and Tunisian] interoperability."

https://www.defense.gov/News/News-St...e-cooperation/

Resolute Support was a NATO-led, non-combat mission. The mission was established at the invitation of the Afghan government and in accordance with United Nations (UN) Security Council Resolution 2189 of 2014. Its purpose was to help the Afghan security forces and institutions develop the capacity to defend Afghanistan and protect its citizens in the long term.

https://www.nato.int/cps/en/natohq/topics_113694.htm

[Ludicus]

Afghanistan wasn’t under US military occupation. It was present with the consent of the democratically elected government, as in Tunisia. That hasn’t stopped you from lying about it.

Stop saying repeatedly that I'm lying. (its painfully obvious who is blatantly lying.It's you)

The U.S. invaded Afghanistan in late 2001 to destroy al-Qaida, remove the Taliban from power and "remake" the nation.Military occupation is the temporary control of a territory by another state (or group of allied states) that makes no claim to permanent sovereign control over that territory.Its nothing new, right?
Why did a military superpower fail in Afghanistan? - The Conversation

It may be attractive to think that promoting democracy in occupied foreign countries is a morally justified and effective path for restoring security and stability. But political reform is more successful when it originates from the local societies and political cultures. In Tunisia, for example, local political movements were able to transform their government, a success due in part to a lack of foreign involvement.

In Afghanistan, international groups like the U.N., alongside nonprofits and independent aid agencies, spent millions of dollars and untold hours of work trying to build democracy, write a constitution, create a bill of rights and otherwise create a new political society.
But this external approach, based on military occupation, was “doomed to fail,” according to official assessments published in 2009 by the Center for Complex Operations at the U.S. military’s National Defense University.

US troops have been in Tunisia for several years now

Read above, previous link. You are confused. America has hundreds of military bases across the world from Honduras to Australia, Japan, Iraq, Qatar to Germany, covering all continents.

-----
A Sudden Downfall in Afghanistan - The New York Times

Afghanistan teaches once again that nation building and democracy cannot be imposed from without; they must come from within.

Capito?
---
Edit,
Did you know that Muslims do not believe the U.S. is serious about self-determination and democracy in their region?
I quote, from another tread,

When asked whether they believe that the U.S. will allow people in the region to fashion their own political future as they see fit without direct U.S. influence, the majority in most Muslim countries disagreed.
...the vast majority of Muslims believe the U.S. lacks credibility in its campaign to promote democracy in the Middle East.

[Lord Thesaurian]

Stop saying repeatedly that I'm lying. (its painfully obvious who is blatantly lying.It's you)

You could consider not lying, as an alternative, so that people won’t have to say that’s what you’re doing. “No you” is not an argument, especially when your lies have been exposed in no small part by your own references. For example:

Why did a military superpower fail in Afghanistan? - The Conversation


The speed and efficiency with which Taliban forces were able to complete the occupation of most of Afghanistan, as well as the quick collapse of the Afghan government, has led to criticism of President Joe Biden’s decision to end U.S. military presence in Afghanistan and of the withdrawal’s logistics.

Your own source states Afghanistan is under military occupation by the Taliban, undermining your whole narrative. It’s a jihadist insurgency backed by a foreign country. Unlike the non-combat support provided by the US military, the Taliban’s presence, expanded through force, was not agreed to by the democratically elected government. Tunisia is also at war with allies of the Taliban, with the support of the US military.

It may be attractive to think that promoting democracy in occupied foreign countries is a morally justified and effective path for restoring security and stability. But political reform is more successful when it originates from the local societies and political cultures. In Tunisia, for example, local political movements were able to transform their government, a success due in part to a lack of foreign involvement.

Of course it’s preferable if force isn’t required to deal with the terror threat to the US while fostering democratic governance as a longer term response to that threat. In Afghanistan, it was. When America abandoned that mission, the terror threat has re-emergd. The author poses a false dichotomy between Tunisia and Afghanistan in any case. The US supported the Tunisian Revolution, US troops have been in Tunisia since at least 2014, and the government recently entered into a long term agreement to work with the US military, all of which is the opposite of “lacking foreign involvement.” The US military is and has been actively engaged in Tunisia to support the government against jihadist insurgents, as was the case in Afghanistan.

In Afghanistan, international groups like the U.N., alongside nonprofits and independent aid agencies, spent millions of dollars and untold hours of work trying to build democracy, write a constitution, create a bill of rights and otherwise create a new political society.
But this external approach, based on military occupation, was “doomed to fail,” according to official assessments published in 2009 by the Center for Complex Operations at the U.S. military’s National Defense University.

Citing an assessment from 2009 is rather odd, given that assessment was proven incorrect when the US shifted its mission to a non combat role and handed security responsibilities over to the democratically Afghan government in 2014, around the same time US troops became active in Tunisia to support the fledgling democratic government there as well.

Read above, previous link. You are confused. America has hundreds of military bases across the world from Honduras to Australia, Japan, Iraq, Qatar to Germany, covering all continents.

As I just mentioned, the US military has been operating from a base in Tunisia, “occupying” the country since 1943, exactly as long as it has been “occupying” Portugal at Lajes. AFRICOM is currently using it as a base for active operations to support the government. Your deflections only sink your narrative further.

A Sudden Downfall in Afghanistan - The New York Times

Capito?

Regurgitating false narratives featured in some opinion article doesn’t help your argument. The US has facilitated the development of democracy from without through force many times around the world with ample success, as discussed (and ignored) in post 13. The US is “nation-building” in Tunisia as well.

[antaeus]

Can you two stop accusing each other of lying. Neither of you is lying. You're both presenting incomplete arguments, therefore allowing room for each other's truths.

[Cyclops]

Can you two stop accusing each other of lying. Neither of you is lying. You're both presenting incomplete arguments, therefore allowing room for each other's truths.

Stop lying about their posts. Jk you're a reasonable poster well worth debating and conversing with.

There are some posts not worth responding to, if a poster habitually calls names and debates in bad faith report them and move on. I put them on ignore too, I am too old for timewasting shillbots.

We (the US and its allies) support some abominable regimes for reasons of realpoltick. Its unfortunate that the Tunisian democratic process seems to have been sabotaged, but I understand why the US would continue to back a regime that serves its interests, even if it ceased to be a democracy.

Is the instability linked to Salafist or other "religious fundamentalist" murdering scum? They sometime infiltrate reasonable protests to create chaos.

[Ludicus]

Tunisia denies establishing any foreign bases - Anadolu Agency june/2020

We do not allow any foreign forces in our country,' says defense minister.
"Tunisia refuses to use its lands to conduct military operations or to establish foreign military units or bases," the defense minister said.
He went on to say: "Tunisia was and still controls its lands, maritime and airspace, and we do not allow any foreign force to be present in our country.

This is not the story of Afghanistan during the last twenty years.There is a long story failed foreign occupations in this country (British, Soviet, America).

the US military is and has been actively engaged in Tunisia to support the government against jihadist insurgents, as was the case in Afghanistan.

It makes no sense to compare independent countries that have military agreements with the United States,(eg.Tunisia), or that accept American military bases on their territories, with Afghanistan, which was invaded and occupied militarily by the invading power for 20 years, and at the end of that time had to withdraw because of war exhaustion.
------
There is already another thread about Afghanistan. The reason for opening this topic was to demonstrate that democracy is possible in an moderate Islamic country

Tunisia's Ghannouchi says parliament in session, defying Saied
Rached Ghannouchi from the Ennahdha party urged lawmakers to resume work in defiance of the parliament freeze by President Kais Saied.

Tunisia’s parliament Speaker Rached Ghannouchi has declared the assembly in session, urging lawmakers to resume work, defying President Kais Saied’s suspension of the assembly in a new escalation of the country’s political crisis.
Ghannouchi’s declaration on Friday looks set to deepen a dispute over the legitimacy of Saied’s seizure of control of most legislative and executive powers in July.
“The office of the Assembly of the Representatives of the People is in permanent session,” Ghannouchi, head of the moderate Islamist Ennahdha party, said in a tweet.
More than 80 deputies, mostly from the Ennahdha and Qalb Tounes, had called for members of the 217-seat assembly to gather outside and demand it be reopened.

----
America in Tunisia and Russia in Libya: we know that the entire world is the playground of the great powers, but this is not a good excuse to support a new dictator,

Joe Biden Needs to Get Off the Fence About Tunisia - The Washington Post.

The most charitable explanation for this lassitude is that the Biden administration was willing to give Saied the benefit of the doubt...The klaxons from Tunis can no longer go unheeded by the world’s leading democracies.