ABSTRACT

After a renewed scholarly interest in the politics of revolution and societal transformation following the uprisings of 2011, the defeat of the revolutionary tide in the MENA region has drawn attention to the dynamic of counter-revolution and authoritarian resilience. I criticise binary approaches to the process of regime restoration in the region. I argue that ‘authoritarian resilience’ should be interpreted in terms of Gramsci’s concept of ‘passive revolution’. I explain that this concept should be used not as a regime typology, but as an analytical ‘criterion of interpretation’, revealing the capacities and constraints of elites to deflect popular initiative and restructure historical blocs from above. Through the prism of passive revolution ‘the regime’ appears not as the constant factor, but as one of the forces that constitutes and is constituted by revolutionary struggle. I look concretely at the process of revolution and counter-revolution in Egypt between 2011 and 2013, disentangling the 18 Days of the uprising from the subsequent ‘counter-revolution in democratic form’ and the coda of the military-led ‘counter-revolution from below’.

摘要

继 2011 年起义后，学术界对革命政治和社会转型重新产生兴趣后，中东和北非地区革命浪潮的失败引起了人们对反革命和专制复原力动态的关注。我批评该地区政权恢复过程的二元化方法。我认为应该根据葛兰西的“被动革命”概念来解释“威权复原力”。我解释说，这个概念不应用作政权类型学，而应用作分析性的“解释标准”，揭示精英转移民众主动性和自上而下重组历史集团的能力和约束。通过被动革命的棱镜，“政权”似乎不是恒定因素，而是作为构成和被革命斗争构成的力量之一。我具体观察了埃及 2011 年至 2013 年的革命和反革命进程，将起义 18 天与随后的“民主形式的反革命”和军方主导的“反革命”的尾声分离开来。以下'。