From the 1980s through the presidential and parliamentary elections in 2012 and 2011. The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt out-performed secular opposition movements at the same period. There are a variety of explanations for this according to scholars.
who claim it’s due to factors like the Brotherhood’s superior organization strength or the special ability of Islam. However, there are many theories that are not unified and don’t include other important aspects. Which means that one has to take a close look at these theories to decide which are the most credible.
Most convincing evidence in support of the success of the Muslim Brotherhood have to divided into two parts. The success they had in parliament elections under Mubarak as well as the elections that followed the removal of Mubarak in 2011.
Regarding the elections under Mubarak, I argue that the Brotherhood’s emphasis of the middle classes. Their policies of the state, as well as the mistakes made by the secular opposition significantly helped. The Brotherhood to win more votes than other opposition parties during the Mubarak period.
In the election of 2011 as well as 2012, the Brotherhood’s emphasis upon economic issues. The indecipherable platform, their wide range of members. And their religious networks enabled them to achieve massive wins.
The first main focus of the article shall be the Muslim Brotherhood’s successes in their time. During the Mubarak Era and the various theories that surround the phenomenon. The primary theory that discussed one that suggests the success. Of the Muslim Brotherhood stems due to economic deprivation. It believed it is that the Muslim Brotherhood provided services to those in need. Who then backed the Brotherhood and provided them with the votes needed to achieve their goals.
But this argument is problematic due to a number of reasons. First, the security forces did not permit the Brotherhood to offer social services to the needy consistently. And frequently intervened to enforce strict laws5. Even though the Brotherhood continued to insist on helping the poor. With services such as providing blankets to families in need.
However, it was not able to result in votes, since very few who benefited. From their services for social purposes were actually able to vote for them. In addition, the Brotherhood was competing with the government in the provision of social service. Mubarak’s government had a huge patronage system that was in place that frequently facilitated those. Who were poor to vote for Egyptian ruling party that is the NDP.
Special Characteristic Brotherhood
Another argument that has to addressed the special characteristic of Islam. And the fact that Muslims obligated to establish an Islamic government that is based on Sharia. But, when using this argument, it doesn’t explain why although a lot of Muslims are believers in Sharia however. They tend to choose to vote for other parties.
Another argument can be that Brotherhood or Islamist groups generally better organized than secular organizations and therefore more efficient. This is a tricky issue because Islamist groups don’t have one model. Of organizational convergence This makes such a broad claim problematic.
In addition, in his research Counting Islam, researcher Tarek Masoud examines the idea. That Islamist organizations better organized than groups of left. In testing their organization using the use of a quantitative research model Masoud. Found that leftist organizations were as well-organized as Islamists.
Another theory suggests that this is due to repression from government officials under the Mubarak regime against leftists. But the Brotherhood was often the victim of repression, too. Their influence often reduced through the Mubarak regime. That was concerned with the rising popularity of the Brotherhood beginning in the 1980s and continuing until the year 15. But these efforts produced mixed results, since the Brotherhood kept some of social networks throughout the period.
Different Brotherhood Theories
In keeping these different theories in your mind, there are other theories that seem more plausible, one of which is the relaxation of the restrictions on Islamists during the 1980s by Mubarak. Following the murder by Anwar Sadat back in 1981 Hosni Mubarak wanted to attain stability in Egypt and therefore he sought to allow conservative Islamist groups.
Furthermore, as a result of the recent peace accord with Israel, Mubarak had to develop connections with West since he had a rift with from the rest of the Arab States and the Soviet Union, He decided to establish relations through an only democratizing the country in a limited way.
Mubarak allowed Brotherhood Members to returned to the country after exile, loosening laws on professional syndicates and also allowed the Brotherhood to join forces in the Wafd party to a candidate for the elections to parliament. Furthermore, the state generally welcomed the Brotherhood’s beliefs but only when it was not in politics.
This was becoming more lenient in the 1990s and 2000s as the Mubarak regime began to crack down on the Brotherhood and attempted to limit their participation during elections. Mubarak took this action because he worried that the Brotherhood could challenge his authority. But this brief time of conciliation was a great help to the Brotherhood create the seeds of their influence, as evident in the relatively liberal 2005 elections to the parliamentary, in which the Brotherhood’s candidate, who ran as an independent were extremely successful.
In addition, the Brotherhood’s focus on the middle class educated significantly helped them gain their support. The middle class with a high education is a powerful class due to its prosperity. Although the middle class isn’t being wealthy however, they have enough money to be able to make vote based on their ideology.
The ruling class was able to gain support through support from the poor, however this doesn’t influence the middle class as readily because of their wealth. The middle class is also insufficiently wealthy to be a beneficiary of the corruption of the regime, making them less likely to support the current regime. The Brotherhood was able to get their supporters in a variety of ways.
They first worked to provide social services to people in middle-class households. This included making sure that they get government assistance like scholarships, and also giving programs on how to fill out tax forms.
They also were focused on the university campuses as well as professional syndicates. For campus universities, they provided incentives for students through the provision of low-cost books and study groups, and also ran candidates through student unions. In addition, students were encouraged to join due to the Brotherhood’s complete control over several professional syndicates.
Active In Syndicates
The members from the Brotherhood who were interested in getting active in syndicates were members of the middle group of Brotherhood and were also students themselves. The members, after being elected, addressed issues like financial corruption and corruption in the syndicates, impressing members and creating the perception that portrayed the Brotherhood as a clean and accountable organization.
This proved to be highly beneficial for those in the middle. They Brotherhood had a higher probability to win in areas with higher incomes and, in these wealthy areas, they performed better than other regions. Finally, other opposition groups have had difficulty gaining significant support from citizens provided an organization called the Muslim Brotherhood a great advantage in the elections.
One of the most prominent opposing groups within Egypt was leftist political parties, however, their insufficiency was due to a range of reasons. For one, many leftist groups depend on unions to support them, but due to the agrarian nature of Egypt’s population, the influence of these organizations was not that high, and they were frequently controlled by the state.
A second aspect of the leftist political platform in Egypt is the distribution of wealth and a strong welfare state. But, due to the huge patronage of the state system, many who would be drawn to the leftist platform decided instead to support the state. These factors, in addition to others, significantly harmed left-wing groups and allowed the Brotherhood to be able to assume its position as the main opponent to Mubarak.
Presidential And Parliamentary Elections Brotherhood
Following the demise of Mubarak in 2011 there were presidential and parliamentary elections in which the Brotherhood gained a majority of seats in the parliament. In addition, the voters chose Mohamed Morsi to be the president of Egypt. There was plenty of speculation about the reason for this as many were based on the same theories utilized in the Mubarak period.
Like more organization and the possibility of an Islamic advantage. However, these theories are again afflicted by similar issues, with some variations. Concerning the targeting of those who are poor, the argument was more convincing after the demise from power of Mubarak. Mubarak regime.
This is due to the fall of the Mubarak regime the vote-buying establishment was dismantled, which gave all parties the chance to gain a crucial voting bloc. It is true that the Muslim Brotherhood did indeed take advantage of this opportunity and did it with the focus on economics that will come up in the future and also its use of patronage.
They also offered Muslim Brotherhood provided small items like cooking oil and provided discounted food on Election Day and offered school classes to show their dedication to those who support the Brotherhood and to convince people to support them in the vote. However, it was not the only way to guarantee the Brotherhood victory.
Brotherhood On Economics
The focus of the Brotherhood on economics was the primary reason behind the growth that was the Brotherhood. The majority of Egyptians believed that economics was the main concern of their lives, and the Brotherhood took advantage of this by making the economy, and not Islam as such, the central goal in their election campaign. Egyptians were interested in a variety of aspects of the economy, like Distribution of Wealth and Ending Corruption, such as the need for connections to obtain the highest paying job.
The Brotherhood were extremely vague on their economic policy that led to disorientation among their voters. The majority of voters thought that the Brotherhood were a proponent of wealth distribution36, however actually, they were capitalists for free markets who emphasized the need for some regulations from the government.
This perception among the public contributed to the Brotherhood among the less wealthy and further bolstered their support base. In the event that the Brotherhood was unable to implement their alleged platform, voters were able to vote against the Brotherhood. In the wake from this fact, the percentage of votes cast for Brotherhood candidates dramatically decreased following 2011’s Parliamentary Elections of 2011.
The Brotherhood gained popularity because of their ambiguous platform. The Brotherhood frequently claimed that Islam is the answer to the nation’s issues however, they didn’t explain how or according to which interpretation. This unclear interpretation of Islam appealed to a lot of people because one could easily superimpose.
Their understanding on Islam as the means by which they believed the Muslim Brotherhood would achieve their goals. Additionally, the various groups within that Brotherhood were a factor in the confusion of their ideology. Within the Brotherhood there were three main factions.
The da’wa faction was ideologically conservative and oversees bureaucratic activities and the allocation of resources within the Brotherhood. They are the pragmatic conservatives also known as the main group of the Brotherhood were still an ideologically conservative view, but with a strong emphasis on participation and engagement.
Then, there are reformists who put an emphasis on party pluralism and women’s rights within the platform of the Brotherhood. The reformists within the Brotherhood were involved in movements like Kefaya’s movement as individuals Kefaya group as individuals. The reformers within the Brotherhood were the only political party that participated in day-to-day activities of Tahrir Square during the 2011 Revolution in Egypt.
Existence Of Groups
This existence of groups led to a great deal of confusion among people, who thought that the Brotherhood was more democratic because of their participation with the Egyptian 2011 Revolution. This led to the support of the Brotherhood among more democratically minded Egyptians and helped the Brotherhood to win.
The network-based approach employed by the Brotherhood’s was also instrumental. In their victory in the parliamentary as well as presidential elections. The Brotherhood made use of vast networks of religious and social they had built over the last three decades. These networks achieved through creating trust in communities, working with people, trust and offering social service.
This contrasts with secular political parties which only had 10 months to build networks. That Brotherhood’s has built over a time period of several decades. So, it’s not a reason to be surprised that the Brotherhood. Made use of their networks more effectively than secular parties ever did.
Mandatory For Egyptians
The presidential election also made it mandatory for Egyptians to support Brotherhood candidates. Brotherhood as the less harmful of two evils. In the presidential election in 2012, the race was a run-off with Mohamed Morsi. The Brotherhood candidate and Ahmed Shafik, a former premier under Hosni Mubarak, who embodied the previous regime. A lot of Egyptians were dissatisfied with these two choices and were forced to pick the one. That they did not like the most and that proved to be Mohammad Morsi.
The Brotherhood’s victory in the elections in and following Hosni Mubarak’s reign sparked. Controversy on how the Brotherhood had achieved this. These theories include the special characteristic of Islam and with a particular focus. On middle or poor class or the idea that Islamic groups were more organized than secular organizations.
A lot of these theories have concerns that render their credibility doubtful, however certain theories. Like the emphasis on the middle class and a vague political platform and an ambiguous agreement. With the Mubarak regime, allowed the Brotherhood to prevail in elections.
It is important to view these elements as a complement to each other. Rather than being distinct factors from each other. Each of them played a crucial role in the success of the Brotherhood. If any of these elements eliminated from the equation. The Brotherhood might not have gotten the same victories in elections that they have.