The Dangers of the Muslim Brotherhood
For those claiming (especially in Western media) that because a party/individual was ‘freely democratically elected’ they should fulfil their term, I’d like to re...
For those claiming (especially in Western media) that because a party/individual was 'freely democratically elected' they should fulfil their term, I'd like to remind them that when the Freedom Party of Austria (a far-right group) came into power via free democratic elections in 1999, the whole of Europe and America refused to support or recognise this rise to power and consequently it was subject to sanctions from the European Union which claimed it was "legitimising the extreme right in Europe."
America and all of Europe rejected this party because they had dangerous ideologies, why is it now that these same countries are coming out in support of the Muslim Brotherhood (a dangerous far-right group) with their only argument being that they were 'democratically elected'?
"I am somewhat appalled at the lack of seriousness with which people take democracy in a country...which has made a clear electoral choice."
The above quotation may sound like it may come from the recent Mohamed Morsi speech, however, it is a quotation from 1999 from the Nazi-sympathiser and far-right leader of the Freedom Party of Austria, Jorg Haider. Morsi's speech in defence of his power followed an identical tone to that by Jorg Haider. The main words being used in his speech including 'democracy', 'legitimacy' and the 'people'.
The Muslim Brotherhood has a dangerous ideology. It is an extreme far-right party that encourages violence, praises the acts of well known terrorists (even going as far as appointing one as a governor) and has assassinated Egyptian leaders. Their rallies fly the Al-Qaeda flag and incite violence towards anyone who disagrees with their plans of a country based purely on Sharia law. They reject any form of secularism and their social media accounts regularly encourage violence against Christians and other minorities.
Surely this group sounds as dangerous as the Freedom Party of Austria and should be condemned and shunned just as they were in 1999. However, this seems not to be the case this time round. Instead, the West keeps repeating the phrase 'freely democratically elected' in regards to Mohamed Morsi and his party as if excusing their dangerous ideologies only because they won a very small margin in an election marred with corruption.
“'This time round though, the West is deciding to side with an extreme far-right group.'
So I would like to ask this question: Why is the West standing with this dangerous far-right group and not with the Egyptian people who managed to overthrow them, when just 14 years ago they condemned and helped the downfall of the Freedom Party of Austria, a group with much of the same ideologies?
From a 2000 Guardian article: "Mr Haider said last night that the EU was showing a lack of respect for democracy." This is exactly what Morsi is saying. This time round though, the West is deciding to side with an extreme far-right group.