Scientific Study Satirically Classifies New Submissive Mammal Species: The 'Sisianus' - Noted for Acute Stupidity and Extreme Obedience

 English Translation

Scientific Study Satirically Classifies New Submissive Mammal Species: The 'Sisianus' - Noted for Acute Stupidity and Extreme Obedience"

A recent scientific study has confirmed that the creatures that have proliferated in the country in recent years are domesticated mammals, indigenous to Egypt, of the species 'Sisianus'.

They belong to the order of higher vertebrates, characterized by short tails, large heads, broad napes, and marked by acute stupidity and extreme submission to those who tame them.

The Pharaohs knew these creatures by the name 'Anṭāʿ Amūn' and used them for heavy muscular labor.

---

Analysis & Explanation for the Foreign Reader

This text is a brilliantly vicious piece of political satire that uses the formal, detached language of a zoological study to deliver a scathing critique of the Egyptian populace under the current political regime. The humor is dark, intellectual, and deeply contemptuous, reducing a perceived political phenomenon to a biological classification.

1. The Satirical Premise: The Citizen as a Domesticated Animal

The core mechanism is the dehumanization of a segment of the population through pseudoscientific classification. The writer creates a fictional species, the 'Sisianus', named after President Abdel Fattah el-Sisi. This immediately frames the piece as a direct and daring attack on the president and his supporters, portraying them not as political opponents, but as a distinct, inferior breed of being.

2. Deconstructing the Satirical Critique:

· The "Species" Description:

  · "Short tails, large heads, broad napes": This physical description is deliberately primitive and animalistic, stripping away human complexity and dignity. The "large head" and "broad nape" might satirize the ubiquitous official images of the president himself, projecting his features onto his followers.

  · "Acute stupidity and extreme submission": This is the core of the political critique. It accuses supporters of the regime of a willful lack of critical thought ("acute stupidity") and a servile obedience ("extreme submission") that makes them easy to govern and control. This is a lament for the perceived death of political consciousness and civic courage.

· The Historical Justification: "Anṭāʿ Amūn":

  · This is a masterful satirical touch. By claiming the Pharaohs knew these creatures as 'Anṭāʿ Amūn', the writer invents a historical pedigree for modern political submission. The name is plausibly ancient-sounding, lending false legitimacy to the fictional study.

  · "Used them for heavy muscular labor": This completes the image of a docile, exploitable class. It suggests that the ruling power, both ancient and modern, views this segment of the population as little more than a source of brute force, to be used for building monuments (whether pyramids or mega-projects) without granting them true agency or respect.

3. Context and Deeper Meaning

This satire is an expression of profound political despair and intellectual elitism. It comes from a place of feeling utterly surrounded by a populace that not only accepts but seems to embrace its own subjugation.

· A Critique of Political Culture: The piece argues that the current political environment has fostered a culture of anti-intellectualism and servility, where independent thought is discouraged and blind loyalty is rewarded.

· The Psychology of Polarization: This text reflects the deep chasm in Egyptian society. It is not just a disagreement with government policy; it is a fundamental disgust with those who support it, whom the satirist views as a different, lesser kind of human.

· The Weaponization of Knowledge: By framing the critique as a "scientific study," the writer positions themselves as a rational observer analyzing a pathological social specimen. It is a way of reclaiming intellectual superiority in a landscape they perceive as dominated by brute force and ignorance.

For the international reader, this text is a raw example of how political conflict can be expressed through the language of dehumanization. It is not a call for dialogue but a scream of frustration from someone who believes they are living among a species of collaborators. It is one of the darkest and most philosophically charged forms of dissent, using the tools of science not to enlighten, but to condemn.