Why is Egypt's literacy rate so low?

[Cheung Mo]

The US State Department has Egypt at 58% and UNESCO has it at 66%.

Why would a country that's been governed by a nominally social democratic party from the Socialist International, much like much of Scandinavia's been, for the past 30 years have a lower literacy rate than some Islamic states like Saudi Arabia and Iran?

And why aren't crap fascist parties like Egypt's National Democratic Party and Venezuel's Accion Democratica marched out of SI meetings at gunpoint? I'm sure the Swedes and the Canadian social democrats don't want far-right shitstains like that there.

http://www.state.gov/r/pa/ei/bgn/5309.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_literacy_rate

[gorillafuck]

The US State Department has Egypt at 58% and UNESCO has it at 66%.

Why would a country that's been governed by a nominally social democratic party from the Socialist International, much like much of Scandinavia's been, for the past 30 years have a lower literacy rate than some Islamic states like Saudi Arabia and Iran?
I wouldn't be surprised if in Egypt, like in many countries, the "center left" is fairly conservative. "Social democratic" parties are very often the same old shit, predictably.


And why aren't crap fascist parties like Egypt's National Democratic Party and Venezuel's Accion Democratica marched out of SI meetings at gunpoint? I'm sure the Swedes and the Canadian social democrats don't want far-right shitstains like that there.
Aren't the NDP in charge in Egypt? And you overestimate how selective the SI are with who they let in.

Hint: They let anyone in. British Labour is in there. Israeli Labor is in there. MDC from Zimbabwe are in there. These aren't left wing parties.

[NoOneIsIllegal]

The book "Class Struggle and Resistance in Africa" gives a pretty good look into the past history of Egypt when it was a welfare/Stalinist state. You might want to check it out; It presents the living standards and situation in Egypt from a Marxist standpoint. I remember it lists examples of how the quality of living in Egypt has actually lowered the past 30 years.

I can't answer your question, but to be fair, even if it ruled by a social democratic party, that means nothing. Countries and regions have differences. A social-democratic party from the middle-east could be far more moderate or conservative compared to a social-democratic party from Scandinavia. Same can go for socialist parties, as many are diverse (just not in tendencies, but other things, such as tolerance of LGBT).

[IronEastBloc]

Because the Egyptian government has very little interest in the development of educational infrastructure and social progress. they spend all their budgeted money on satisfying the corrupt and appeasing the rich.

It's the reason why a country like Cuba can have half the GDP but triple the literacy rate and 1/4 the poverty.

[MarxSchmarx]

A major impediment is the lack of free elections in Egypt. This also explains why nominally "leftist" governments like Mexico and China have been a disaster for the working class. By contrast, free elections in Venezuela and Nepal, for example, provide the reformist politicians at all levels of government a concrete incentive to try to improve people's daily lives.

Having said that free elections of the rulers are not a panacea - India for example has a pathetic track-record when it comes to improving people's daily lives, and the Indian reformist politicians, including the self-proclaimed communists, have often let a system of patronage and endless internal bickering subvert the benefits of free elections.

Which brings me to my next point - corruption. Free elections force reformist politicians to be accountable to the public, but only work if graft and influence peddling are also attacked. This is a big reason why Chavez's program in Venezuela is basically stuck in a rut.

Absent free elections and a culture of anti-corruption (such as exists in Scandinavia), however, we have to rely on incredibly benevolent leaders to do the right thing. Despite occasional successes, the track-record on this front is pretty dismal.

The Egyptian politicians, moreover, see themselves as hanging on to their secular government by a thread - the government has decided that harsh authoritarian rule is the only way to prevent an Iranian style theocracy, and has ruled by emergency decree for the last 30 yeaers. What keeps the fear alive is the fact that their neighbors aren't fond of the fact that they are an arab state that broke ranks viz. Israel, and that they are an American ally given their military is paid for by the United States. So they stand out as a sore thumb of the Arab world and have serious domestic opposition to their very legitimacy. All this makes for a very unstable situation, and creates a culture in which graft and suppression of elections seems like a necessity for survival. Indeed, given that the NDP sees itself as under siege, their "social democratic" heritage and goals take a definitive second place to keeping themselves in power. Ironically it is a lot like the Israeli labour party in this respect.




And why aren't crap fascist parties like Egypt's National Democratic Party and Venezuel's Accion Democratica marched out of SI meetings at gunpoint? I'm sure the Swedes and the Canadian social democrats don't want far-right shitstains like that there.


Part of it is institutional inertia - the SI isn't just made up of well meaning democratic socialists from Sweden and Canada but also deeply cynical and underwhelming groups like the Australian and British labor party, the Mexican PRI o_0 and the Pakistan People's Party(!), a whole bunch of opportunistic ex-communist groups, and the PSOE.

[Die Neue Zeit]

A major impediment is the lack of free elections in Egypt. This also explains why nominally "leftist" governments like Mexico and China have been a disaster for the working class. By contrast, free elections in Venezuela and Nepal, for example, provide the reformist politicians at all levels of government a concrete incentive to try to improve people's daily lives.

Having said that free elections of the rulers are not a panacea - India for example has a pathetic track-record when it comes to improving people's daily lives, and the Indian reformist politicians, including the self-proclaimed communists, have often let a system of patronage and endless internal bickering subvert the benefits of free elections.

Which brings me to my next point - corruption. Free elections force reformist politicians to be accountable to the public, but only work if graft and influence peddling are also attacked. This is a big reason why Chavez's program in Venezuela is basically stuck in a rut.

Stalin contemplated having competitive elections in the mid 30s and even after the war. Despite the absence of such, I suppose the Soviet literacy boom could be explained by the industrialization drive. Yet, India too had an industrialization drive.

My reaction to your comments: :confused:


Indeed, given that the NDP sees itself as under siege, their "social democratic" heritage and goals take a definitive second place to keeping themselves in power. Ironically it is a lot like the Israeli labour party in this respect.

The former ruling party of the GDR felt under siege, too. :confused:


Part of it is institutional inertia - the SI isn't just made up of well meaning democratic socialists from Sweden and Canada

Since when was the NDP a "well-meaning democratic socialist" party (the old CCF is another story), or are you referring to other Canadian parties in the SI?

[Dimentio]

The main reason is that Egypt began with a mixture of bureaucratisation, heavy industrialisation and war against Israel, not putting as much attention on education, healthcare and family planning that they should have.

Moreover, corruption and misinformation is characteristic for Egypt. In the wars of '56 and '67, Egyptian local commanders sent wildly exaggerated reports about fictional military victories to their superiors, who acted on the information.

[Sankara1983]

I wouldn't be surprised if in Egypt, like in many countries, the "center left" is fairly conservative. "Social democratic" parties are very often the same old shit, predictably.


Aren't the NDP in charge in Egypt? And you overestimate how selective the SI are with who they let in.

Hint: They let anyone in. British Labour is in there. Israeli Labor is in there. MDC from Zimbabwe are in there. These aren't left wing parties.

That's not precisely true. They have rejected the Socialist Party of Serbia (Slobodan Milošević's party) and the New Azerbaijan Party.

[MarxSchmarx]

Perhaps I got a bit off topic here. I didn't entirely intend to refer to the literacy rate specifically, but rather the failure of the Egyptian government to live up to any of its social democratic objectives, of which the educational goals are one.

The cases you raise, particularly about the former eastern bloc, I think illustrate this broader point, but you are right, they don't get at why illiteracy specifically has failed to be eradicated in Egypt. I think part of it does have to do with the fact that the NDP for the reasons mentioned doesn't functioned as a serious social-democratic (as in SI) party, but you are correct that an explanation for why the anti-illiteracy campaigns failed does merit a fuller explanation than merely writing it off as another authoritarian regime that gave up on socialism in all but name.



A major impediment is the lack of free elections in Egypt. This also explains why nominally "leftist" governments like Mexico and China have been a disaster for the working class. By contrast, free elections in Venezuela and Nepal, for example, provide the reformist politicians at all levels of government a concrete incentive to try to improve people's daily lives.

Having said that free elections of the rulers are not a panacea - India for example has a pathetic track-record when it comes to improving people's daily lives, and the Indian reformist politicians, including the self-proclaimed communists, have often let a system of patronage and endless internal bickering subvert the benefits of free elections.

Which brings me to my next point - corruption. Free elections force reformist politicians to be accountable to the public, but only work if graft and influence peddling are also attacked. This is a big reason why Chavez's program in Venezuela is basically stuck in a rut.Stalin contemplated having competitive elections in the mid 30s and even after the war. Despite the absence of such, I suppose the Soviet literacy boom could be explained by the industrialization drive. ...

My reaction to your comments: :confused:



Although the USSR at least under Stalin was not really a "social-democratic" regime that saw itself as working towards the end goal a mixed economy with a strong safety-net, is a good counter-example. I guess it would be a case where strong leadership did carry the day. I do think, though, that the miserable record of that regime in terms of improving just about every other measure of a good living standard does, I think, reflect the failure of the bolsheviks to deal with corruption and the lack of competitive elections.




Indeed, given that the NDP sees itself as under siege, their "social democratic" heritage and goals take a definitive second place to keeping themselves in power. Ironically it is a lot like the Israeli labour party in this respect.

The former ruling party of the GDR felt under siege, too. :confused:


But wasn't the ruling party of the GDR not a really continuous entity from the earlier SDP but rather a run of the mill eastern bloc communist party that answered to Moscow?



Part of it is institutional inertia - the SI isn't just made up of well meaning democratic socialists from Sweden and Canada

Since when was the NDP a "well-meaning democratic socialist" party (the old CCF is another story), or are you referring to other Canadian parties in the SI?

I didn't mean parties, because as you correctly note the institutions are far from socialist, but individual activists inside the party (and I've met a few from theCanadian NDP and Swedish soc.dems) are accurately characterized as well-meaning democratic socialists.

[Devrim]

It's the reason why a country like Cuba can have half the GDP but triple the literacy rate and 1/4 the poverty.

Of course the fact that Cuba has about one-eighth of the population of Egypt, and therefore a far higher, in fact about 50% higher, GDP per capita, has absolutely nothing to do with it at all.

Devrim

[Die Neue Zeit]

I think part of it does have to do with the fact that the NDP for the reasons mentioned doesn't functioned as a serious social-democratic (as in SI) party, but you are correct that an explanation for why the anti-illiteracy campaigns failed does merit a fuller explanation than merely writing it off as another authoritarian regime that gave up on socialism in all but name.

Perhaps it bungled in its economic development program? At one extreme, to undergo something like the Soviet industrialization drive would have required anti-illiteracy campaigns.


But wasn't the ruling party of the GDR not a really continuous entity from the earlier SDP but rather a run of the mill eastern bloc communist party that answered to Moscow?

True, but by siege I was referring to its proximity to the highest concentration of NATO forces. The extensiveness of the Stasi reflected the siege conditions, too.

[Kiev Communard]

Modern Egyptian government is a bunch of neoliberal crooks, one should never expect from them even the most limited social-democratic reforms. Don't forget that even under Nasser the Left in Egypt was effectively outlawed/subjugated to state apparatus (with the USSR's tacit approval), while Sadat and Mubarak turned Egypt in neoliberal dream come true - ruthless dictatorship with "excellent opportunities for the foreign investment". They don't care about literacy - the more superstitious and ignorant the Egyptian workers and peasants are, the better for the local ruling class (including Islamist "opposition" of "Muslim Brotherhood").

[ComradeOm]

Elections have nothing to do with literacy. Industrialisation is only indirectly related

Cutting illiteracy rates is very, very simple. It requires moderate investment in establishing an inclusive education system. The allocation of additional funds for adult illiteracy programmes has also proven to be effective. Urbanisation helps but ultimately this comes down to a question of political will. The reasons behind this might differ - the French third Republic sought to turn peasants into Frenchmen, the Bolsheviks took it as a matter of principle, the Stalinist economy needed trained workers/engineers, etc - but where this will is present it is possible to slash illiteracy within a generation

So talk about making the Egyptian government more receptive to such measures should not disguise the fact that the basic cause for these high illiteracy rates is that Mubarak et al simply don't care

[MarxSchmarx]

But wasn't the ruling party of the GDR not a really continuous entity from the earlier SDP but rather a run of the mill eastern bloc communist party that answered to Moscow? Perhaps it bungled in its economic development program? At one extreme, to undergo something like the Soviet industrialization drive would have required anti-illiteracy campaigns.



True, but by siege I was referring to its proximity to the highest concentration of NATO forces. The extensiveness of the Stasi reflected the siege conditions, too.

On the other hand, how much of a difference did the East German government make to literacy? My understanding was that adult illiteracy was effectively gone in Germany well in advance of the GDR's establishment.


Elections have nothing to do with literacy. Industrialisation is only indirectly related.

Cutting illiteracy rates is very, very simple. It requires moderate investment in establishing an inclusive education system. The allocation of additional funds for adult illiteracy programmes has also proven to be effective. Urbanisation helps but ultimately this comes down to a question of political will.

Sure, but I think this is begging the question - why is there no political will among the Egyptian political class to improve the lives of other Egyptians, including improving literacy? The answer is in large part that they are not accountable at all (and by design) to the workers and the peasants. There is no real competitive advantage on the international market that the Egyptian state can gain from advancing literacy programs. The elite do not need more infusions of cash. The only real reason to have it is to promote social mobility, and that is something that the Egyptian political class no interest in doing - a situation which free elections and anti-corruption policies can at least begin to address.

[Die Neue Zeit]

There is no real competitive advantage on the international market that the Egyptian state can gain from advancing literacy programs. The elite do not need more infusions of cash. The only real reason to have it is to promote social mobility, and that is something that the Egyptian political class no interest in doing - a situation which free elections and anti-corruption policies can at least begin to address.

No more Egyptologists needed? ;)

[MarxSchmarx]

There is no real competitive advantage on the international market that the Egyptian state can gain from advancing literacy programs. The elite do not need more infusions of cash. The only real reason to have it is to promote social mobility, and that is something that the Egyptian political class no interest in doing - a situation which free elections and anti-corruption policies can at least begin to address. No more Egyptologists needed? ;)

Lol. I imagine Egyptologists are a serious liability for the Egyptian state - even the really talented ones produce so little value from the government's perspective, and in any event their education and training can be outsourced with a nominal scholarship.

In all seriousness, the Egyptian education system, for all its faults, still produces too many relatively well-trained professionals. Egypt has a real glut of university-educated people and although there is something of a brain drain, enough of the "cream of the crop" stick around that the emigration of educated people actually is quite beneficial to the Egyptian ruling class as it keeps potentially querrelsome people out.