Huzzah, huzzah.

Our "advanced Western world" has its own ideological flaws. One such flaw is the idea that "democracies"--in the sense of systems of majority rule--are inherently good (there is a great deal more to genuine democracy than this). This flaw connects up to the flaw of cultural relativism on the left, and, on the right, to the flawed belief that all religions offer good moral foundations for societies. These flaws allow Islamists to make remarkably deep ideological alliances on the left and the right; in the Democratic party and in the Republican party.

I'm not convinced much coming out of the Mid. East could cause Westerners to repair these flaws. The failure to get a functional Iraq--and even the ethnic cleansing of the Iraqi Christians--doesn't seem to have had much of an impact on Western faith in theocratic mob rule (for evidence, see mainstream left-wing and right-wing commentary on the rise of the Brotherhood). "Intellectuals" all around the Western ideology ring have failed to learn the actual lessons of Iraq (as they had previously failed to notice the reasons Iraq would not be a "cakewalk"). And, regarding ordinary folks, compared to Muslims Western Christians don't identify much with their foreign coreligionists (granted, probably because Western Christians are invested more in their own valuable, productive lives than in deranged world domination games).

Maybe two examples of dismal failures will trigger pattern-recognition in Western viewers; maybe it won't. Maybe it will trigger pattern-recognition along the lines of racial categorization, such that Western policy makers quietly associate the failure with dark skin rather than Islam. (Surely it would have been harder for white-skinned Russians to pull off this duplicity on peacefulness with State than it has been for the Brotherhood--and despite leakage of the latter's internal documents!)

I expect continued Islamist pressure in both parties, working hard to keep up the flow of American wealth to Egypt, even as and after Egypt becomes an Islamist state. On account of Western flaws, I have concern this pressure may be successful.

Taking the anti-American line internally while posturing as necessary to win American support worked to bring the Brotherhood to this point, and I expect them to maintain the act to keep the wealth flowing as Egypt passes into their rule. I don't see the West shifting gears easily, provided the Brotherhood keeps playing things smoothly (their leadership is savvy; I expect them to keep it smooth enough).

The only realistic hope I have is that somehow Westerners who don't live in clouds and who value hard earned wealth and innocent human life--rank-and-file Christian Republicans, and/or supporters of Israel, and/or classical liberals (...unicorns, manticores...)--might somehow wrest control of an American political party from the various ideologues. (The dynamics of the 2010 elections offer some grounds for this hope.)

Regarding the oil producers: One and his cousin against the outsider. In the short term, the oil producers would rather see the Egyptians eating American bread than whining to them for the oil money. In the long term, a gaggle of poor, undereducated Muslims supported by infidels may have its uses. And the oil producers have the political connections they need to frequently get what they want in DC.

Not all rich men are satisfied with sports cars and harems. There is a reason many very rich men take up politics, spend millions on it, and risk what the public eye will do to their private sex lives. And in Islam, we are dealing with a political and mental domination program which works on scale of generations.

For people playing world power games, having a country of Muslims living on the brink of starvation, and expecting their bread to come from Infidels--who can be blamed in a heartbeat for any problems arising from this scenario--has advantages. Look, for example, at how the Levantine Arabs are used--horribly, bloodily, miserably used--to enforce the principle that even a tiny slice of land, once stolen into Dar al-Islam, must not be allowed to revert to rule of the original owners. (In contrast, consider what a fruitful, productive paradise their lives and land would constitute were they working as economic partners with the Israel.)

With the focus shifting increasingly from land consolidation to global spread, how valuable will the millions of pwned Egyptians be? And for whatever talk there might be of Egyptian pride in this demonstration business (the Brotherhood were meeting with State, which holds the purse-strings; where is the pride in having your fight for change ridden by left-wing Americans and Islamist fanatics?), the religious programme to which they have subscribed leaves them ultimately pwned by the real Arabs.

I don't have faith the Egyptians will realize how they are being played in this game, in this generation. Questioning religious allegiances is hard, as is facing that at the pride-point of one's youth, one was in actuality used as a tool. Pulling the US funding might pressure such realizations--if there aren't scapegoats available for tensions to be taken out on. But, such a thing happening at all is so very conditional on the US voters, and more: on how things which stink to the voters may nevertheless be tucked away into political programmes on account of the two-party system.