Document claims Obama engineered early war extrication and avoided Syria involvementDick Cavett forwards an anagram linking President Trump to Putin
Case File
d-16994House OversightOtherAcademic analysis of political order in Egypt citing Huntington
Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #023472
Pages
1
Persons
0
Integrity
No Hash Available
Summary
The passage is a scholarly commentary on political theory with no specific allegations, names, transactions, or actionable leads involving powerful actors. It offers no novel or controversial informat Discusses Huntington's theory on political instability and crony capitalism References the Arab Spring context (Tunisia, Egypt) in 2011 No mention of specific individuals, financial flows, or miscond
This document is from the House Oversight Committee Releases.
View Source CollectionTags
political-scienceacademic-literatureegyptarab-springhouse-oversight
Browse House Oversight Committee ReleasesHouse Oversight #023472
Ask AI about this document
Search 264K+ documents with AI-powered analysis
Extracted Text (OCR)
EFTA DisclosureText extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Article 3.
The American Interest
Political Order in Egypt
Francis Fukuyama
May - June 2011 -- While academic political science has not had
much to tell policymakers of late, there is one book that stands out as
being singularly relevant to the events currently unfolding in Tunisia,
Egypt and other Middle Eastern countries: Samuel Huntington’s
Political Order in Changing Societies, first published over forty years
ago.1 Huntington was one of the last social scientists to try to
understand the linkages between political, economic and social
change in a comprehensive way, and the weakness of subsequent
efforts to maintain this kind of large perspective is one reason we
have such difficulties, intellectually and in policy terms, in keeping
up with our contemporary world.
Huntington, observing the high levels of political instability plaguing
countries in the developing world during the 1950s and 1960s, noted
that increasing levels of economic and social development often led
to coups, revolutions and military takeovers rather than a smooth
transition to modern liberal democracy. The reason, he pointed out,
was the gap that appeared between the hopes and expectations of
newly mobilized, educated and economically empowered people on
the one hand, and the existing political system, which did not offer
them an institutionalized mechanism for political participation, on the
other. He might have added that such poorly institutionalized regimes
are also often subject to crony capitalism, which fails to provide jobs
and incomes to the newly educated middle class. Attacks against the
existing political order, he noted, are seldom driven by the poorest of
the poor; they instead tend to be led by rising middle classes who are
frustrated by the lack of political and economic opportunity—a
Forum Discussions
This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.
Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.