Structured Response 10/12/12 - Mike Friel

        Social movements in the MENA region have a history of mixed success. Recent publicity surrounding the Arab Spring uprising has brought much more focus to this history. If we are to understand or fully examine the success and failure of these social movements and what potential they hold as functioning avenues of democratic participation in the region, then we must examine the success and failure of these movements through their relationship to the states and the actors surrounding and incorporated into these states.
         First there is the question of what kind of state will allow for a successful social movement, is it better to be a larger or smaller state? One that has a weak or loose bureaucracy? According to Lisa Anderson these are two of the central questions regarding Middle Eastern statehood, the "construction of the state" and the "modern form of its bureaucracy". While neither Anderson nor Weldon offer any sort of answer as to what specific kind of state will best promote a social movement, it can be inferred that a small one with a loose bureaucracy would most be most effected by a social movement and allow for democratic participation, as there would be less people to organize efficiently and a weaker resistance by the government. On another note though, a state with a stronger bureaucracy would probably be more favorable for a social movement that means to take control of the government, for it would enable a pre-existing system to have been established to run the daily affairs of the country.
        In terms of specific opportunities or challenges that social movements wishing to function as an avenue of democratic participation in the MENA region may experience there are several to consider. First is the the challenge presented by the general lack of contact legislators tend to have with their constituents. If participants in a social movement become accustomed to constant interaction with those in charge and the powers that be, then they will be mightily upset when their former leaders become the powers that be and do not maintain such contact. Secondly there is the challenge of a lack of electoral response fo marginalized groups within a social movement. Social movements tend to start as a formation of a marginalized group within a society, but once they become active and gain a goal and a means, they tend to marginalize other groups that do not fit with their goals, causing potential problems for democratic representation down the line. There is one opportunity presented with social movements as democratic representation. As previously stated, social movements generally tend to start as marginalized groups organize themselves. While there is the potential for marginalization within these movements, there is nothing to stop these freshly or re-marginalized groups from starting their own social movement (after all they just had a first hand example of how to conduct such a movement!).
      Democratic representation in the MENA region is a touchy subject, and with the rise of social movements in the region, they are a force that must be reckoned with to fully grasp this subject and provide a suitable answer.