Dr. Hossam Badrawi Official Website
The story goes: a man and his wife owned a goose that laid a golden egg each day. Foolishly, they assumed the goose must contain a great deal of gold inside, and driven by human greed, they decided to slaughter it to claim all the gold at once. But when they did, they found the goose was like any other. By killing the goose in hopes of becoming rich and paying off their debts, they deprived themselves of the steady income they had from the daily golden eggs.
An old tale, yet it repeats itself at the level of nations and governments.
A young man once said, “I have many friends in small and medium enterprises (the geese), and they are struggling immensely.”
His colleague responded, “There’s a contradiction between the government’s rhetoric of supporting the private sector and the immense pressure it places on that same sector — especially the small and medium-sized businesses.”
I said, “I recognize the government’s seriousness, and I understand that in the midst of a crushing financial crisis, it seeks to collect as much tax revenue as possible to fund the state budget and pay off debts.”
I added, “In the spirit of national transparency — and to confirm what you’re saying — I’ve recently met with many business owners who are crying out over what they consider unfair tax pursuits regarding old closed files, sometimes going back decades. They’re threatened with accusations of tax evasion, prison, or forced to pay taxes and interest on losses that the tax authority refuses to acknowledge. If I didn’t trust the people who told me these harsh details, I wouldn’t have brought it up.”
“At the same time,” I continued, “declaring bankruptcy or exiting the market due to repeated losses is nearly impossible. Even if a business shuts down due to genuine financial hardship, the government continues to pursue the investor relentlessly — it always considers itself right, and it has the upper hand.”
“On the flip side,” I said, “I’ve seen many instances where private sector companies are owed payments by government-affiliated institutions — payments that the state does not fulfill. Meanwhile, the bank loans used to fund these projects continue to accrue interest, eating up the company’s profits and eventually driving formerly profitable businesses into loss. This situation repeats itself every day. It devours earnings and pushes companies into bleak uncertainty. And no one protects these investors in such cases. But when it comes to payments due to the government — often arbitrarily calculated and dismissive of a company’s financial statements — the investor faces either unjust payment, evasion, or surrender to the imbalance of power and the absence of timely justice.”
“We must acknowledge,” I said, “that neither you nor I fully understand the extent of the conspiracies and pressures Egypt faces — aimed at generating destructive chaos in a country striving to recover from economic and social crises amidst a global storm created by a European war we have no stake in, preceded by a pandemic we didn’t cause, and a so-called ‘Arab Spring’ that left in its wake years of unrest and terrorism. Add to that the brutal war in Gaza over the past two years, the collapse of more than half of Suez Canal revenues due to terrorism in the Red Sea, and a growing fundamentalist pull dragging us backward.”
A young political science graduate interjected:
“Doctor, we understand the pressure Egypt is under — politically, socially, and economically — but our current crisis originates internally before externally. To move forward, we must stop repeating the same actions expecting different outcomes. Political science teaches us that repeating failed approaches leads to the same failure.”
“Our socio-economic crisis requires a comprehensive vision — built on existing achievements and based on a unifying philosophy, not random leaps inspired by a minister or prime minister. Good intentions alone are not enough. Integrity without competence won’t deliver success. Individual brilliance cannot replace institutional teamwork. Development without sustainability is incomplete.”
I said, “I’m impressed, my dear. Give me more of your thoughts.”
Another young woman added:
“I want to remind you of your article about ‘the half’ — mentioned in your book Dialogues with Youth for a New Republic, and discussed on TV programs. You wrote in Al-Masry Al-Youm and said” — she pulled out a paper and read:
‘Are we ready to choose? Are we prepared for a cultural, social, and political shift that doesn’t just enlighten minds and reshape our future to align with global progress, but one that drives that progress itself?
Or are we stuck between half openness and half closure?
Do we want a strong private sector creating jobs? Or a state-controlled sector? Or some vague mix of both depending on circumstance?
Do we want a vibrant civil society and active NGOs? Or do we stifle them with complex regulations?
Are we a modern civil state or a regressive religious one? Everything I see tells me we’re stuck in the middle — not fully religious, not fully civil. We allow laws that block human discourse under the guise of divinity. We’re returning to the old kuttab model, adding religious studies to final exam grades, with Al-Azhar institutes monitored by a religious committee in parliament, not the education committee!
We work tirelessly to craft strategies that champion human rights, but treat each other in contradiction.
We claim to protect women’s rights, but still won’t remove religious identification from ID cards — implying identity is tied to religion, not nationhood.
We say we protect freedoms, yet we allow pre-trial detentions to stretch into years, often without proper investigation — a punishment in itself controlled by executive power.
These are examples of realities that could change with the stroke of a pen — and swiftly.
You — the future leaders — must sail through these shifting tides with reason, facts, and caution.
And government agencies, especially those dealing with the public, must avoid allowing system failures — despite digitization — to fuel the very chaos they seek to prevent.’
I began with a story, so let me end with another — the story of the bear who loved its owner. Wishing to protect him from a fly landing on his head, it crushed him with a stone to swat the fly away.”
At this point, the mother of one of the young participants chimed in:
“Dear Dr. Hossam,
Your writings and engaging dialogues with bright youth reminded me of the crushed citizen — caught between the goose and the bear.
What can the citizen do when facing the terror of chaos, the fear of insecurity, and the dread of returning to a rigid religious regime?
Let us forgive the rational, hungry citizen if he slaughters the goose just to survive today — as the saying goes: ‘Feed me today with the goose, kill me tomorrow.’
And let us also forgive the cautious, fearful citizen who clings to the bear, saying: ‘The devil you know is better than the devil you don’t.’
You know, dear Doctor, that the call for reform must begin with reforming education, healthcare, and justice. We must unify fundamental concepts within a framework of free expression, skill development, job creation, and adopt a sustainable, clear economic policy backed by a detailed roadmap and implementation plan — all while strengthening the independence of legislative and oversight institutions.
We have less than five years until 2030. Standing still doesn’t mean standing in place — politically and culturally, it means retreating.
There can be no renaissance without first awakening society.”
Would you like this formatted as an article or for publication on a website or blog?
