There is no glory for saying "no" and no shame in saying "yes"

There are elites with names that contributed to its creation "no" at the expense of its achievement in reality, creatively, scientifically, or even socially.

This is how the late Egyptian poet Amal Dunqul began his poem Spartacus' last words, evoking the personality of the leader of the first and most famous slave revolution in history, who dared to attack Rome and led a revolution that almost killed it.

“No” was and still is a political slogan, even socially and culturally as well. It is a slogan that the bearer inserts into every issue to announce his rejection, rebellion, dissent, and his own image. “No” is like the stick that leads from their blindness oppression, injustice and marginalization to some light, some special truth. But was this “no” really that? Was “yes” really a sign of stagnation?

Let us first agree that this “no” that poets, artists, cinema, theater and even demonstrations glorified and continues to glorify, is not the same, it is almost infinite, there it does not spring from fear and introversion, and another is formed from doubt and confusion, there it does not emerge from pain and another from stubbornness or Dogmatism, there does not mean weakness and suspicion, another means ignorance and arrogance, and another emphasizes selfishness and excessive self-love at the expense of others, there even does not mean yes.

Some of the Arab elites have been famous for their “loyalty” against colonialism and dictatorial regimes, and they have been subjected to abuse and persecution, but it is wrong to put all of this elite in the basket of the rebellious “no” that rejects and resists and calls for a better reality for its people.

The relationship of most of them with “no” is like the relationship of most of them to writing poetry, few write it for themselves or for themselves in a special aesthetic or artistic vision, many write it chanting hoping for a place in a love relationship or a special voice or some center among people, the reasons are many and sometimes funny, despite What is in poetry of human dignity carried by the voices of the tormented and the margins and the forgotten through the centuries.

The "no" that led Spartacus was a noble, resounding cry of history, immortalized as a valiant leader forever, but did it improve the conditions of the slaves, whom we slayed after defeat? History tells us that it did not. Far from the moral, aesthetic and poetic evaluation, people always need beyond the “no”.

The “no” is raised when the chest is narrowed by patching, it is for demolition, and then what is demolished must be built. If the demolition is not followed by a building, we will find ourselves in ruins that have nothing but emptiness.

I will cite the Tunisian scene in the last few years until today. There are many noa’s owners from the time of the police dictatorship, through the revolutionary path that Tunisia witnessed from December 17, 2010 to January 14, 2011. The no’s played a major role in mobilizing the rejectionist street, burdened with oppression, marginalization, social injustice, restrictions, political repression and lack of freedom.. The “no” was decisive. In the slogan "bread and water and Ben Ali not." It is the “no” that Tunisians gathered around, until they breathed for the first time the air of a free homeland. But what happened next?

The elites who encouraged the people's "no", and had their nos, were like the people in that they do not know what after the "no", it is normal to not know, we can think of a path. To build beyond the rejection and rebellion. But the difference between the elites and the people was wide, elites carried their “loyalty” and managed for themselves a certain position, a job, a political or civil work, and a financial return. As for the people, their loyalty continued to wither alone, not knowing what to do next, while the weight grew until the “no” of every one receded. To ring him in a pause.

One of the elites of the Tunisian left, who has been a leader in his party for thirty years, became famous for saying “no” to anything and any issue, until it became a joke, and the “no” that led peoples to their freedom and their future became just an easy tool for action.

Returning to the first question about “yes” if it is a sign of complacency, the excessive glorification of the “no” has led to the underestimation of the “yes” as if it only means submission, while in one of its aspects it is what establishes consensus, and no state or group can exist Or others without consensus, i.e. yes, excessive consociationalism is a type of mental illness that represents submissive and impersonal personalities and can be treated. But compatibility is necessary.

Tunisia, like the Arab world as a whole, we need today to expose the false and destructive no's, we need what "no" like those established by the national movement against French colonialism and which established the post-independence state, modern Tunisia. We need to establish a balance between the “no” and the “yes.” Not every rejection is a virtue nor every consent is a dispossession. The balance is what establishes a people’s different ideas, perceptions and visions, but it is compatible about the homeland, the values ​​of human rights, the superiority of culture, law, citizenship, the necessity of democracy and the importance of renewal and constant thinking about The future, past and future generations.