Recently a prominent Muslim public figure posed what he said is the stark choice available to the Egyptian opposition. Either they can protest every day non-stop for the next 4 years, or they can go home, sit, and submit to another 60 years of military rule.
There are a number of problems with this statement.
First of all, it is dishonest. It narrows all available strategic options of resistance to a single tactic. This is a false dichotomy; either demonstrate in the streets or surrender. But it is a false dichotomy with an agenda.
Narrowing the frame of the discussion in this way undermines the ability of the people to brainstorm and develop creative strategies. It seeks to eliminate from consideration any approach other than that of a particular group, while the group refuses to discuss tactical options that do not support their own political interests.
The group may call for demonstrations primarily to show how many people respond to their call, thereby strengthening their bargaining position vis-à-vis the government.
This, again, is a problem with parties and groups. It is an easy mistake when you are part of a group to think that the general welfare of the people and the ascendancy of your party are one and the same thing.
It is also a problematic statement because, obviously, it perpetuates the false notion that the problem in Egypt is El-Sisi and the coup, and totally ignores the complete subjugation of the country by Multinational corporations, foreign banks and investors, who own El-Sisi, and who arm, train, and own the army.
And, again, this reality is ignored because it does not serve group interests to discuss it. If the problem is El-Sisi, then the solution must be to have someone from the group in his position instead. This is obviously incorrect. If the party or group is ignoring the conquest of Egypt by the forces of neoliberal imperialism now, there is no reason to believe they will address it if they enter government.