The crisis of the Jordanian left with the arms of power

A shift in thinking and direction, and a coup against democracy and political reform.

“What, Pasha, is a democrat.” This may be just a phrase that does not mean anything and is always repeated among Jordanians in small or big issues and exclusively when addressing retired or serving generals.

But it means more politically, at least, when he addresses it in a denouncing rather than questioning context. One of the most prominent symbols of the Jordanian left among members of the Senate is a colleague in the same council who is retired from the military institution, and after a discussion during the clash with the legislative process of texts related to political reform.

This phrase was spotted as a paradox that re-establishes a vague and sometimes incomprehensible situation, not at the level of the Senate as an institution, as it is clear and direct and performs its duties. But at the level of those elites, for whom seats are provided in the name of leftists and Jordanian democrats, within the framework of a process that has been going on for years, entitled a shift in thinking and direction, rather a coup against democracy and political reform for intellectuals with leftist colors who are sometimes polarized or lured into the bosom of power.

Once again, such a stray phrase sheds light on one of the paradoxes of the elite local political scene. 

Democrats, supporters of the civil current, leftists and, to a lesser extent, some Islamists appear in revolutionary paradoxes against what they were proclaiming on the street sometimes without a clear or explainable reason.

Of course, this happens when luring and then enjoying the advantages of the seat, the job, and the privileges that the bosom of power provides to the polarized under the headings of political coloring.

For example, a tangible majority of representatives of the civil movement and symbols of the left was clearly noticed when forming the royal committee to modernize the political system, and one of the sources directly informed Al-Quds Al-Arabi observers that the composition of the aforementioned committee intended to include everyone who opposed the cruelty of the regime or even a wide range of insults in some identities.

Despite that, the document to modernize the political system came out with a very moderate description in the context of political reform. Union activist Ahmed Abu Ghanima noticed early on that the leftist color and the advocates of the civil movement were accumulating heavily in the bosom of the authority.

But this accumulation was supposed to lead, instead of having a quota or a quota in the name of the fiercest leftists or advocates of civilizing the state, to a real coloring in favor of democracy and political reform.

While the first conclusion emerged, the second conclusion disappeared, and the old theory, which you have heard for many years, “Al-Quds Al-Arabi” from a veteran politician, Dr. Mamdouh Al-Abadi, has been put to the test.

All the time, he advises al-Abadi that real democracy is made by democrats.

But when the arms of the state managed to attract democrats from outside the Islamic color several times to positions of the first row and to the first-class chairs in the state, not everyone noticed the accumulation of a real democratic and reform product that constitutes milestones recorded in favor of the state of marriage that was twice exciting between the authorities and the leftists and advocates of the civil current in more than one from place.

Of course, to be fair, such conclusions cannot be generalized. The former Prime Minister, Dr. Omar Al-Razzaz, responded one day to Al-Quds Al-Arabi, saying: "We are not alone in society."

But phrases such as “You will be democratic, Pasha” and pushes from all kinds of theorizing about power and denying its interference in the engineering of elections establish the same paradox that everyone sometimes feels, as there are no differences in favor of democracy and political interest when sleeping in the bed of power and government.

Instead of adding leftist and democratic political flavors or spices, theorizing will become against Islamists and in favor of keeping things as they are, the signal that is picked up before others. .

At the same time, political exclusion is entrenched in the opinion of the Islamic opponent, Sheikh Murad Al-Adayleh, and despite the aforementioned vaccination, the climate against real reform continues, as arrests have multiplied without charge and there is a difficulty in the options for political action, tightening of security grips, and abuse of powers sometimes.

It is very remarkable that the forces of the popular movement, for example, talk about this and criticize it, but those who are supposed to be democratic intellectuals in the bosom of power do not.

It is a paradox that must be discussed in depth, because polarization in the form of redress is not enough, and because the rise of ideology opposed to political Islam with left-wing or democratic intellectuals is not enough as a justification for conservative biases, even when the references give a segment representing the civil current the opportunity to form an entire government, as happened with the government of Prime Minister Dr. Razzaz .

In any case, the retired general did not start from a democratic angle, but rather from a social equity angle in legislation. The term "leftist intellectual" here indicates what is further and deeper in the duality of the Jordanian left and the embrace of power.