A great example of El Naschie telling his Egyptian audience what he thinks they'd like to hear so as to gain their approval.
First of a series of columns. He says he's finishing tomorrow, but that seldom happens.
El Naschie compares Egypt with several large Western democracies, or democracies «at least in name» as he puts it. The main difference he sees is that the "so-called democracies" have all had civil wars or other large-scale internal conflicts, while Egypt hasn't, for at least 3,000 years. He says the West is jealous of that stability and hates Egypt because of it. (Speaking as an American, I can say El Naschie's comparison has never occurred to me, nor ipso facto made me hate Egypt, and I suspect most people in European democracies would be baffled by this strange theory of his. He is saying it only because he thinks Egyptians would like to hear it. Only two days ago, certain Egyptians celebrated their national unity by blowing several dozen other Egyptians to smithereens in Alexandria, but El Naschie makes no mention of that.)
He thinks Egyptian family life is archetypally democratic. His strict military officer father nonetheless gave the family a large area of personal freedom, he says. El Naschie says he's "ready to give up many of the formalities of so-called Western democracy for the maintainance of the unique Egyptian character and national unity." May I point out that El Naschie the hypocrite does not live, and does not have to live, in the country whose democracy he's happy to sacrifice. Despite great fanfare about a return to Egypt after years in Germany and England, he continues to live primarily in a gated mansion in Surrey and to receive medical care in Wimbledon.