Political turmoil in the Mideast is par for the course, and political revolution tinged with religious overtones is a part of ancient Egyptian history. Back in the day, King Tut’s daddy, Pharaoh Amenhotep IV, changed his name to Akhenaten as the proponent of a then-revolutionary proto-monotheism focused on the sun (Aten). In a land with a plethora of gods and plenty of sun, but no Ray-Bans or SPF-anything, this endeavor was doomed to fail. And indeed, for his efforts, Akhenaten was banished from history for 3,000 years.

What’s critical about the current commotion in Cairo is that the results will likely have profound repercussions that extend beyond Egypt and the Mideast. We hope that Egyptians understand this, but we know that Islamist bosses within and outside Egypt are absolutely aware of what may be a very narrow, but very attractive, window of opportunity.

So, while millions of people around the world cheer on the “popular revolt” in Egypt, the real question is what will the Egyptian people choose to do to themselves and the world? Historically, most political revolutions have failed to achieve their leaders’ lofty goals. The United States of America is an extraordinary exception; the Reign of Terror in Revolutionary France, the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, the Republic of Cuba and the Islamic Republic of Iran are, sadly, more representative of the usual outcomes of revolutions.

Still, Egyptians could be smart and lucky and make choices that redound to their benefit — and not just to the benefit of the leaders they select. But to do so, they’ll have to avoid the following fatal flaws:

Botching an election. Democracy is unpredictable, particularly in regions that lack much experience with it. After the Israelis unilaterally withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005, Palestinians inexplicably razed the Israeli-built infrastructure and voted for Iranian-backed Hamas — which then proceeded to transform Gaza into a terrorist incubator that spends its precious resources on rockets to fire over the border into Israeli schoolyards.

Even a nation with a strong electoral legacy can botch an election. In 2008, a critical mass of Americans weary of the outgoing Republican administration voted for the “Not-Bush” candidate — who turned out to be a socialist law professor with no leadership experience. I know Obama supporters who were shocked — shocked! — that the new president, upon assuming office, immediately began pursuing his socialist agenda. Now, the U.S. economy struggles against increasing government intrusion because too many Americans did not do their homework.

If Egypt is able to use the voting booth to overhaul its government, Egyptians must do their homework. They cannot afford to be as intellectually lazy as U.S. voters were in ’08. On the eastern horizon, an Iranian regime is pursuing regional hegemony by underwriting global terrorism and developing nuclear weapons. Within Egypt itself, there are elements dedicated to restoring a medieval Muslim caliphate. At this critical juncture, Egyptians have a responsibility to the world to examine and understand the background, support, and true intentions of any prospective leader.

Of course, informed voters can botch an election, too, by electing undemocratic thugs with deadly imperial visions and an inability to play well with others. Recall that Germany voted the Nazi Party into power in 1932. Electing an Iran-apologist or an up-and-comer from the Muslim Brotherhood would likely result in one more Israel- and America-hating Islamist entrenched in the regional sandbox, walloping against civilization.

Making a lateral move. Revolutions drain societal energy. If the result is an improvement — more political and economic freedom, more opportunities for more people — then the energy expenditure is justified and recycled. But if the society simply swaps one tyrant or group of tyrants for another, then it’s merely exhausted itself for nothing. The new fearless leader will exploit societal fatigue to entrench himself and his supporters and make it extraordinarily difficult for the society, when it recovers from its weariness, to do anything about the “new order.” Exchanging an honestly corrupt authoritarian regime for a fake “people’s republic” is not progress — and usually condemns the nation to a dismal future for decades. Witness Cuba.

Subscribing to an “ism” of prejudice and hatred. If the revolutionary party promises benefits for one group to the detriment of another, all will suffer when that party ascends to power. The twentieth century witnessed the ascension to power of totalitarian regimes that, in the name of fascism and communism, murdered millions deemed to be of the “wrong” race, economic class, or religion.

Subscribe to an “ism” of prejudice and hatred and those poisons will permeate your country’s social fabric and corrupt its soul. Ultimately, your country will end up a national prison, the government using walls and force to keep its populace from escaping. Remember, no boat people risked their lives on treacherous seas trying to get into post-revolutionary Cuba or Vietnam.

Islamism, the successor-apparent to fascism, candidly substitutes a culture of death for a life-affirming credo. Both the Muslim Brotherhood and its offshoot, Hamas, declare that “death for the sake of Allah is the loftiest of its wishes.” Well, not really the loftiest — that would be reserved for the death of Western devils.

Proceeding without a map. The successful revolution needs a direction and a plan. Replacing order — even oppressive order — with chaos generally leads to more misery and oppression. The French Revolution began with the overthrow of a bloated, oblivious monarchy but ended with Napoleon’s imperial dictatorship. During the bloody 11-year interim, France lurched from radical democracy to terrorist oligarchy to constitutional republicanism and finally succumbed to a military coup. It was a period of intense political opportunism and is notably represented by the image of the guillotine.

Of course, a good plan needs good leaders. The U.S. and Israel are sparkling examples of emerging nations that were miraculously blessed with brilliant founders who put together workable, democratic plans and courageous heroes who helped their very different countries emerge victorious against great odds. Whether such leaders exist in Egypt or the Arab world remains to be seen. Without them, an Egyptian revolution will beget, at best, a legacy of national decline and, at worst, bloody revolution throughout the region and an expanded infrastructure for anti-Western terrorism.

Samuel R. Lewis is an assistant general counsel for a global telecommunications company. He writes commentary on current, past, and future events based on his diverse experiences as a former U.S. Army officer, parent, and participant in some of the most tumultuous events of the past 20 years in the business world.