The Egyptian 2011 revolution has usually been depicted as a non-ideological popular revolution against the corruption of state institutions, economic inequality, police brutality, and the subsequent repression of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces (SCAF). Yet General El-Sisi’s ascendency after the massive popular protests that culminated in the deposition of former President Morsi on June 30th, 2013 and their unprecedentedly violent aftermath gave way to a profoundly different national narrative. The post-July 2013 regime turned the villains of the 2011 revolution into the heroic defenders of another, very different, ‘revolution’ against ‘Islamist terrorists’. The bringing down of two regimes in less than three years has transformed Egypt into a symbolic ‘zone of conflict’ with running battles over the meaning of “Egyptian-ness”. The struggle to redefine the nation particularly in times of crises underscores how revolutionary upheavals cause tremors and social schisms that prompt resonant ‘symbolic resources’ to develop as mobilizers of collective action. In such a charged atmosphere, rival protagonists draw on different ‘usable pasts’ to produce alternative collective representations of the nation. Anomie and alienation experienced by individuals during periods of rapid social change may lead to yearning for more organic, timeless interpretation of a nation’s or religion’s symbolic resources. Hence, when ideological lenses diverge in times of rapid change, social conflict may erupt as sub-groups in society contest different versions of national identity. Often times, class, religious, and other social conflicts entwined with specific cultural idioms may shape the outcome of the post-revolutionary struggle for state power. Against the modernist emphasis on material domains and structural analyses of contention, this study seeks to delineate the main contours of the discursively constructed national narrative of the post-July, 2013 regime in Egypt. In order to analyze this episode of contentious politics and the often under-researched/under-theorized aspects of revolutionary outcomes, this study adopts an ethno-symbolist approach along with insights from social movement/mobilization literature. Central to this study is an analysis of the master frames used by the new military regime in order to mobilize its constituents by reference to popularly resonant claims. Far from fostering a democratic, inclusive polity, this study argues that the official narrative sought to create a multifaceted hegemonic discourse to consolidate a new authoritarian order of an unprecedentedly repressive-exclusionary nature.