actual, on-the-ground improvements. This would not necessarily make

actual, on-the-ground improvements. This would not necessarily make Egypt worse off, but it could further weaken the economy as revenue from key industries, such as tourism, continues to decline. It would not improve conditions either, as improvements, unfortunately, take longer that the voting public generally likes. The potential upshot of this option is that, hopefully, over time, mass action would become more and more cohesive and leaders start to emerge from the morass. This would bring developed political parties into Egypt’s political system and potentially, leaders from outside the military and the elite as well. This, however, will remain only a temporary option. Revolutions, or even mass action, are difficult to maintain over time. Moreover, if some improvements, particularly economic improvements, do occur, the majority of the country will acquiesce to a nondemocratic government. The best example of this is the Chinese government, which has managed economic growth without any accompanying political liberalization. Eventually, either a government will improve conditions for the average Egyptian, or it will become so repressive that mass action ceases to be a viable option. The third option is a total crackdown on any and all political movements and the return of a repressive and autocratic government. The impetus behind this path is the idea that establishing stability is the first and foremost priority of the government. If you establish stability, the rest will follow. Or, if the government is truly cynical, it simply does not care what happens as long as the ruler and his or her cronies are taken care of. Right now, it looks as though Egypt has chosen to go with option three, the return to repression under military rule. The first step for any autocracy is to get a firm grip on the political process, weeding out the opposition. This is precisely what has been occurring. Massive repression of the Muslim Brotherhood is the most obvious example of this process. While there are some legitimate security concerns regarding the Muslim Brotherhood ties to ongoing violence, banning the entire organization and labeling them all as terrorists is like using a sledgehammer on a nail—overkill and likely to create a mess. It does, however, have the benefit of getting the only meaningful political party out of the current political scene and that is a key step in political consolidation. Other examples of consolidation abound, including HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_031571