I was invited on a satellite channel to discuss the worries of Egyptian citizens, which reminded me that in 2011 Gallup carried out 148 surveys around the world based on this question: Did you experience any of these feelings yesterday: physical pain, worry, sadness, pressure, anger?

In the first part of this article, I have argued that Islamists, especially the Brotherhood, have recently demonstrated an immense fear from the so called "civil" camp. This is evident in their attacks on the "civil" groups in prayer sermons and various other media outlets. The pressing question is why would mighty Islamists be so frightened from their supposedly “insignificant” competitor? Surely it can’t be because of the size or strength of the latter — or is it? I for one believe that what is now known as the “civil” camp is larger than Islamists want to believe, but is nevertheless smaller than to properly account for the Islamist anxiety above. The roots of the Brotherhood’s panic must lie elsewhere. So let me propose instead that the Brotherhood and its allies are actually afraid of “the people,” even if they formulate their fears as hostility towards the “civil” camp.

To those unfamiliar with the “civil”/religious debate in Egypt, the term “civil” was recently dubbed to mark an assembly of disparate, sometimes conflicting, ideologies and positions that stand for the creation of what has come to be known as a “civil state.” This “civil state” is in turn commonly imagined as something that stands against a theocratic (Islamic) state, but not necessarily against political Islam per se — for there are several Islamic versions of the “civil.” The term “civil” forced itself on public debate for the first time perhaps during the 2005 parliamentary elections, when the Muslim Brotherhood emerged as the only serious contender to the old ruling party. Since then, its evolution led it to acquire multiple meanings, like all other political signifiers. One can even make the ready argument that it is currently but an empty signifier, but such is true of all political signifiers (for example, the much cherished linguistic mess that we call “democracy”).

Egyptians, along with others in the region, drew parallels between the Kuwaiti situation and the revolutions of the Arab Spring

A Muslim Brotherhood leader whose views did not change after the group reached power said he is more worried about the Brotherhood

I do, however, make a link specifically between extremism and how medicine and engineering are taught

Roughly 2,400 electors on 29 October will cast ballots to narrow the field for the papal seat of the Coptic Orthodox Church from the current five candidates down to three

Roughly 2,400 electors on 29 October will cast ballots to narrow the field for the papal seat of the Coptic Orthodox Church from the current five candidates down to three.

To my mind, the revolution was only an escalation of the polarization between those who want change and others adamant on maintaining the status quo. In February 2011, those who chose the revolution insisted on bringing down the head of the regime to open the gates of change. Their insistence on change caused them to be accused of wanting to drive a rift in society, but those accusations did not stop them from revolting and engaging in street fights on 2 and 3 February, in what came to be called the Battle of the Camel. These battles were a perfect manifestation of that societal polarization.

The Muslim Brotherhood did not do anything odd when their Supreme Guidance Bureau decided to mobilize members and send them to the streets to stage a protest on October 12 to call for purging the judiciary of corruption and sacking the public prosecutor. It is quite common for those in power to decide to resort to street protests to boast their popularity, alongside their use of official channels to disseminate their views.

The volume of aid Egypt has received is more than the majority – if not all – of its Third World peers have ever seen. In the 1950s and 1960s Egypt had special ties to the Soviet Union, which no other non-Marxist country enjoyed. International relations are not necessarily built on ideological or religious harmony, but most essentially economic and strategic interests. Egypt is a key state, which is why Soviet military and economic assistance flowed generously in its direction.

When the sun goes down, Cairo bursts to life. Men play backgammon and smoke water pipes. Young fashionistas meet friends for midnight coffees. Families go shopping with small kids in tow.

While the state does not intercede in some disputes it chooses to decisively intervene in others, which shows its bias towards the “big shots” at the expense of the weak and marginalised. This contradicts the president’s promise in his inaugural speech that everyone is equal in front of the law. It also contradicts the notion of justice that demands bias towards the weak.

This column has been absent for two weeks. I’d been on a longish trip to a slice of heaven on earth, Ubud, Bali. The six-day Writers and Readers Festival, to which I’d been invited, stretched to 11 days as I travelled from one end of the Silk Road to the other, some 20 hours going in and a harrowing 30-hour journey back, added to which, a nerve racking, if ultimately pleasant 24 hour delay due to a ticketing mishap. (The festival’s organizer, the wonderful Janet, kindly put me up in a charming, if wholly incongruous in my case, Honeymoon Guesthouse.)

Last month, Egyptian teachers came from every governorate and gathered on Qasr al-Aini Street in front of the Cabinet. They were fed up with their financial conditions and were tired of being ignored. After gathering exactly one year earlier to demand better pay and the overall improvement of the education system, their demands had been forgotten like many others before them. “Long Live the teachers’ struggle,” they shouted with fervor and conviction. September was a month of strikes, they said. It seems the Independent Teachers’ Syndicate is adamant on making this statement a reality.

Last month, Egyptian teachers came from every governorate and gathered on Qasr al-Aini Street in front of the Cabinet

The idea of commitment to the state education plan stops all grassroots initiatives and closes the door to creativity

Since the January 25 Revolution, Egyptian politicians have pondered what to do about the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty - is now the time to be making changes?

In order to live in dignity, you need first to live. Nothing takes priority over the right to live. That is why I do not understand how a society could leave someone to die, or to barely survive, because he or she does not have enough money to "buy" that right.

Some forces who participated in the revolution object to the Egyptian-Israeli peace treaty, although many add that their objection does not mean going to war. They of course realise that war, like love, must be between two sides and decisions are not taken unilaterally. Also, that the other party will decide whether it is in their interest to live with a no-war no-peace status once again, or go to war before Egypt regains its strength and the revolution succeeds in its development process, making it the “strong Egypt” Abdel-Moneim Abul-Futouh talked about.

One year ago, nearly 30 Egyptians, almost all Coptic Christians protesting against sectarian violence, were murdered as they marched at Maspero, the Egyptian Radio