The Social Solidarity and Security Net - {The Egyptian Explained}

 

The social Solidarity

The Role of Social Solidarity in Egypt’s Governance

In Egypt, a strong sense of solidarity emerges from the social need for support in the face of inadequate services and other essential amenities. This solidarity has become a security net, often replacing the government’s role in providing adequate services to citizens. As discussed in The Glocal Controversy, this social security network reflects the bottom-up approach to governance, a model commonly recognized in developing countries facing local governance challenges.

Social Networks as a Replacement for Government Services

At the heart of Egyptian society lies a robust social fabric, where individuals, regardless of their social class, rely on deeply rooted networks of family, relatives, and friends. It is uncommon for Egyptians to be self-isolated from these networks. From the smallest unit, such as the family, to larger social groups, everyone relies on mutual favors and the provision of certain services within these networks. In a society where government services may often be inadequate, the success of the community depends largely on the quality of communication and cooperation among its members. In some cases, individuals may even thrive more in these environments than in well-managed societies, thanks to the close-knit and well-maintained social networks. Effective communication plays a crucial role in facilitating services and resolving needs without the intervention of governmental regulators.

The Role of Social Solidarity and Its Limitations

Social solidarity in Egypt can be found across various groups defined by class, religion, or common goals. Due to the absence of a unified pattern for governance, Egypt has a multitude of sub-groups and agglomerations that benefit certain segments of society. These groups range from small family units to multinational companies or religious sects.

While there are significant benefits to these social networks, there are also notable drawbacks. On the positive side, these networks foster solidarity among members, ensuring that individuals are held accountable within their communities. The networks also facilitate access to services, bypassing the bureaucratic hurdles that often come with government administration. The larger and stronger the network, the more easily an individual can have their needs met, benefiting from the support of those within the group. In some cases, these networks extend even beyond national borders, providing social support to members abroad.

However, the lack of an authorized and regulated structure for these networks introduces several risks. Without an external authority to enforce social standards or hold members accountable, favoritism, nepotism, and partiality can flourish. In such systems, the social values or ethical codes that maintain a functioning society may be undermined, benefitting only specific groups or individuals rather than society as a whole.

The Manipulation of Social Networks: A Socially Acceptable Strategy

Egypt’s social structure is highly open to anyone wishing to project and present their social pitch. This openness creates opportunities for individuals to manipulate social networks in ways that might be considered socially acceptable, or at least overlooked. One common approach is the use of a well-crafted emotional narrative that positions the individual as a victim. This strategy exploits the collective sympathy in Egyptian society, where many people have experienced some form of injustice.

The emotional background of Egyptian society—shaped by ongoing struggles with governance—creates a fertile ground for individuals to present themselves as victims, garnering sympathy from others. People are often inclined to empathize with those who they perceive as suffering from injustice, making it easier for the victimized individual to achieve their goals, even if those goals are less than noble.

Additionally, exaggeration and false realities, often seen in media dramas, can also be used to manipulate social perceptions. Well-executed drama has a powerful effect on Egyptian society, where even TV series or actors who portray struggles similar to those of the public can garner immense public support. This dynamic is not unique to Egypt, as the emotional responses triggered by compelling drama are universal as discussed in Naguib Sorror .

Conclusion

In conclusion, the reliance on social networks in Egypt serves as a critical tool in compensating for the deficiencies in formal governance and services. While these networks provide solidarity, accountability, and ease of service provision, they also introduce challenges such as favoritism and the potential for exploitation. The social dynamics of Egypt allow for the manipulation of these networks through emotional appeals and dramatic narratives, reflecting both the strengths and weaknesses of this social system. Ultimately, while social networks can foster support and unity, they also expose the vulnerabilities of a society without a regulated, accountable governance structure.