The events of the Arab have become the most remarkable political events of the twenty-first century. The aftermath of these events are still discussed actively in the world media, partially because the Arab Spring has not ended yet even though its climax is already over. Some say that the Arab Spring has demonstrated the lack of emotional and psychological readiness of the Arab people for democracy. Others, on the contrary, view these events as the sign that the Arab World is on the edge of a radical shift to a large-scale westernization.
To begin with, it is necessary to define the two key terms that are central to this discussion: the Arab Spring as a phenomenon and democracy as a philosophy that is viewed to be guiding this phenomenon. In simple terms, the Arab Spring can be defined as a series of protests that took place in many Arab countries (e.g. Libya, Egypt, Morocco, etc.) beginning from 2011; the protests were in favor of democracy. In this context, democracy can be defined as an alternative to the oppressive regimes that established in the protesting states; this alternative is essentially underpinned by such values as tolerance, individual freedoms, and free market. Thus, it is not surprising that the main initiators of these protests were young people – the population that is commonly characterized as more progressive, sensitive to discrimination, and keen on liberty. The other population that was actively involved in the protests was composed by the local elites – the individuals who are generally more tolerant to the western views (because they have money to travel and, thus, better understand these views) and more educated (what enables them to understand that oppressive regimes like those established in their countries have no future and do not have any competitive advantages as opposed to the liberal regimes).
Use your promo and get a custom paper on
"To What Extent Does the Arab Spring Show That the World Is Now Ready For Democracy?".
The outcomes of the Arab Spring as a sociopolitical phenomenon are ambiguous. On the one hand, from the ideological perspective, the Arab Spring was one of the most large-scale events in our history. It clearly showed several important changes in the Arab world. First and foremost, it showed that the Arab youth is far more westernized than one could have expected. Second, it revealed that the power of social networks is universal: they are capable of uniting people in any part of the world. On the other hand, however, it would be wrong to claim that the Arab Spring has reached its goals. In effect, the most distinctive outcome is an ongoing civil war that broke out in some states involved (e.g. Syria). Some say that this means that the Arab World turned out to be not ready for democracy. This, however, is a very superstitious view on these events. In reality, the ambiguous outcomes of the Arab Spring demonstrate that the cost of democracy differs from culture to culture: it appears that it is especially high for those cultures that are historically characterized by adherence to conservative values, patriarchal ideology, and monarchies as the preferable form of governance.
In conclusion, it can be argued that it is too early to judge the aftermath of the Arab Spring. What is already evident is that these events have clearly demonstrated that the Arab World, especially its young representatives have not escaped the all-powerful effects of globalization. Thus, they no longer feel comfortable being isolated from the western world as well as being in an opposition to the western liberal values. It is likewise apparent that they are longing for overall democratization and liberalization. The question remains as to what price they will have to pay for this democratization. Based on the recent events in Syria, this price will be rather high.
