In recent decades, neoliberalism has shifted from being merely an economic trend to becoming a political and social doctrine that imposes the logic of the market on all aspects of life. And because this model has come to dominate public policy in the West—and subsequently in the Arab world—it has become necessary to reexamine its impact on our societies, especially in Egypt, and to present an intellectual alternative capable of restoring balance between efficiency and justice, between market freedom and human dignity.

Against this tide stands social liberalism—the philosophy I belong to—as a realistic and humanistic approach that restores the individual to the center of the equation, and protects society from the imbalances of the market, without being hostile to freedom or growth.

Neoliberalism is built on four core pillars:

1. Reducing the role of the state in services and production.

2. Large-scale privatization of public institutions.

3. Price liberalization and reliance on market forces.

4. Betting on investment and the private sector as the main drivers of growth.

On the surface, these ideas appear attractive: markets are efficient, competition is productive, and government bureaucracy is slow.

However, experience has shown that turning the market into a doctrine creates a society where the weak have no choice but to submit—or fall out of the equation entirely.

Egypt has adopted increasingly neoliberal policies since the mid-1990s, at first gradually, then more aggressively. Although these policies have yielded gains in infrastructure and investment, the social cost has been significant.

Three decades ago, no one imagined that universities would become investment projects.
But today:

• Private and international universities have spread extensively.

• Tuition fees have soared beyond the reach of most families.

• The public university’s historic role in enabling social mobility has declined.

• The government has even created “non-profit” universities which, in reality, function as state-owned private institutions.

This tells us that we have shifted from “education for humanity” to “education for those who can pay.”

Similarly, although universal health insurance projects are a positive step, reality shows that a large segment of Egyptians rely on the high-cost private sector, that medical expenses suffocate families financially, and that healthcare— even in public hospitals—has gradually turned into a profit-driven domain at the expense of a basic human right.

Price liberalization, while economically necessary, leads—without social protection—to:

• Unreasonable increases in the cost of food and housing,

• Erosion of purchasing power,

• Decline in quality of life,

• And growing feelings of injustice.

Without balance between market and state, the ordinary citizen becomes the weakest link in a merciless chain.

Neoliberalism offers citizens only two choices:

Either succeed alone… or fall alone.

And in a country like Egypt, where:

• A large portion of the population is young,

• Unemployment is high,

• Purchasing power is declining,

• And the educational and health systems require real support,

Leaving the citizen to face the market alone is like abandoning him in a stormy sea—without a ship and without a life jacket.

Social Liberalism

In contrast, social liberalism—my intellectual home—reorders priorities.

It does not abolish the market nor oppose the private sector, but states clearly:

The market is a means to prosperity, not an end.
The state is a guardian of justice, not a competitor to the market.
And the human being is the center of all policy.

Social liberalism rests on a vision grounded in:

1. Social justice as part of freedom—not a contradiction to it.

2. Equality of opportunity as the core of the social contract.

3. An active state role in education, healthcare, housing, and public transportation.

4. Supporting the middle class as the pillar of stability.

5. A free market operating within legal, ethical, and regulatory frameworks.

In this philosophy, the citizen is not abandoned to market fluctuations, and the state does not become a merchant competing with its own people; rather, it becomes a partner that organizes, protects, and inspires hope.

Behind every economic system lies a philosophy of human nature.

In neoliberalism, the human being is an individual with no safety net—seen through the lens of Hobbes or the new Darwinists: a competitive, self-interested being seeking personal gain.

Thus, economic life becomes a battlefield, and the first rule of the market:

“Profit goes to the strongest.”

But social liberalism views the human being as “John Rawls” and “Rousseau” did—and as I do:

As a moral being who deserves equal opportunity before competition.

It teaches that freedom is not merely the absence of constraints, but the ability to choose;
and that justice is not charity from the wealthy, but a right of every citizen.

What Does This Mean for Egypt?

It means we need to recalibrate the direction of the ship—not to oppose the market, but to make the market a tool, not a master; and to make the state a partner, not a burden or a competitor.

My vision for a socially liberal Egypt may include:

• Restoring the public university as an engine of social justice.

• Developing world-class technical and vocational education.

• Making health insurance truly universal and genuinely effective.

• Expanding work-linked and production-linked social safety nets.

• Regulating markets through anti-monopoly and consumer protection laws.

• Facilitating the creation of national industries that provide stable jobs.

• Considering housing, healthcare, and education as rights—not commodities.

These steps are not dreams, but necessities to build a society that respects the human being.

What Future Do We Choose?

The struggle between neoliberalism and social liberalism is not merely economic; it is an existential question facing Egypt and the world:

Do we want a bigger economy… or a bigger society?
Higher numbers… or fairer lives?
A market without limits… or human beings without fear?

The future will not be built by privatization alone, nor by subsidies alone, but by balance:

An efficient market, a just state, and an empowered citizen.

Whenever human beings return to the center of policy, society returns to the center of life.

A New Egyptian Model: “Neo-Masrism”

We must admit that the ingenuity of governance in Egypt has produced a new hybrid model—a blend of neoliberalism and social liberalism—which I name:

“Egyptian Liberalism” or “Neo-Masrism.”

“Neo-Masrism” is the claim of adopting a political ideology while practicing its opposite.

For example:

• A core aspect of social liberalism is state neutrality in the market and non-competition with the private sector in areas entrusted to it. This is what the Egyptian government declares—but often does the opposite.

• Another essential aspect is respecting legal frameworks in state-private sector contracts. Yet in many cases, agreements are overridden, the state imposes itself, acquires shares in projects, or violates contracts without accountability.

Thus, we practice social liberalism in form, while practicing the worst type of neoliberalism in substance, where the state dominates the market as a disguised private-sector entity, acting as a primary investor under symbolic names for state-owned agencies.

We must be more transparent.