Egypt's revolution succeeds in removing Mubarak. A win for Democracy or Socialism?

Today, February 11th of 2011 will surely go down in Egypt's history as a turning point and will perhaps be immortalized as a national holiday.  After more than two weeks of reasonably peaceful protests and striking the Egyptian people have achieved their primary demand, Hosni Mubarak has stepped down.  While this revolution may just be a foot note in western historical texts, what transpired was indeed truly remarkable.  Consider, after thirty years of autocratic rule and a systematic suppression of all opposition a dictator running a police state has been removed by the people!  However as always in this world what meets the eye may not be reality.  

First, as I have maintained earlier, my belief is that the underlying reason for what transpired is economic and not because of Mubarak's authoritarian rule.  Media sources describing events in Cairo would often mention that rising food prices and unemployment were problems that Egyptians wanted resolved, but always suggested that this was hardly a primary cause.  My simple conjecture is that humans can endure a lot of hardship, but suddenly not being able to afford basic food staples is not one of them.  Of course Egyptians just like many Americans do not make a correlation between sudden and unexpected food prices and central bank's monetary policies, instead they view the current leadership as the culprit.  Unfortunate, but true.   

Secondly, what has actually occurred today has left many questions and although Tahrir square is absolutely electric with jubilation and celebration, what really happened?  Hosni Mubarak resigned, according to the Egyptian Constitution the de facto leader in this situation is the speaker of the Parliament.  Instead, power has been transferred to Egypt's Supreme Military Council and its leader Mohamed Tantawi. The Council has sacked the existing Government and suspended all "civil" government essentially forming a military junta through a coup.  Is this what the people wanted?  I suppose time will tell, but considering that the military was an indispensable force during the Mubarak regime one has to wonder what really changed?  Is this not just more of the same, but with a new face?  

There is another, little known, but awfully important aspect to the Egyptian military, the economy.  In a piece on NPR several experts suggested that the unique history of the Egyptian military lend itself to taking a gigantic role in the Egyptian economy.  

One reason for the military's peaceful response: the unique role it plays in the Egyptian economy. The military owns "virtually every industry in the country," according to Robert Springborg.

Some estimates suggest that 40% of the economy is owned or run by the military.  According to ZeroHedge, 70% of all Egyptians work for the Government.  Therefore one can assume that a military takeover was the inevitable outcome. 

Thirdly, what should now become obvious, the entire notion of democracy has to be put into question.  While individual Egyptians willing to die in the name of democracy is undeniable and extremely admirable, what sort of change can be expected in a country where the entire economy is run by the Government?  Is this not really just another struggle between traditional totalitarian forces?  On one side there exists the military complex and autocratic leaders like Mubarak and on the other a strong socialist/labor union contingent clashing for control.  This is the same struggle that Germany went through in the 1920s and 1930s with the fascists ultimately defeating the communists.  At the end of it all it is difficult to locate and determine where true democratic, free market and individual liberty forces are.  Is it a coincidence that the Party of Socialism and Liberation stood with the Egyptian protesters?   Or the Socialist Appeal? Or the Socialist Alliance? Or the socialist webzine which states pretty clearly: 

Socialists everywhere are inspired by mass revolt of the Egyptian people against the dictatorship of Hosni Mubarak. 

It is becoming rather apparent that the revolution of the past two weeks was nothing more than a Che Guevara style revolt lead by the youth (coincidince?), joined with labor unions against the "fascist" Egyptian Government.   Let's not forget that the Bolshevik Revolution was initially a peaceful takeover brought forth by the people.  We all know what happened next.

Imagine for a second that American college students, joined by the SEIU, UAW and other major unions stormed Washington DC demanding more "democracy".  What do you suppose the underlying desire of that kind of movement would entail?  A return to America's Constitutional past, individual rights and respect of private property?  Somehow I doubt it.  

Lastly, what transpired in Egypt will invariably affect the entire Middle East region in ways we cannot imagine.  One can only imagine what the reaction of all the people who currently live under despotic regimes are thinking at this moment seeing a 30 year leader shoved out by the military under the pressure of a revolting population.  Leaders in places like Syria, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and even China have to think long and hard about what might await them.  
What this all means for overall global stability is unclear and more importantly what this means for the growth of a true genuine free market, individual rights and freedom is even murkier.  

We live in interesting times.