Author |
Share Topic Topic Search Topic Options
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Topic: Your opinion of the Egyptian elections Posted: 13-Sep-2005 at 00:15 |
Originally posted by ok ge
Originally posted by Constantine XI
Well 23% constitutes
everyone who cares or is physically able to vote. Better than
compulsory voting like we have here, driving the uninformed and
apathetic to the polls.
|
Where is it complusory voting Constantine? |
At least in Belgium voting is compulsory, but also in some other
countries, though I'm not able to name them right now... I think it's
the mark of a sick democracy. What kind of election is that one where
people who have no opinion is forced to give one? It makes no sense.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Constantine XI
Suspended
Suspended
Joined: 01-May-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5711
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2005 at 03:25 |
Originally posted by ok ge
Originally posted by Constantine XI
Well 23% constitutes
everyone who cares or is physically able to vote. Better than
compulsory voting like we have here, driving the uninformed and
apathetic to the polls.
|
Where is it complusory voting Constantine? |
Here in Australia it has been compulsory since the 1920s. We are one of
the few countries in the world (I think the exact number is 4 or 5)
which force their citizens to vote. If we don't we get fined. I think
only in Australia, Belgium, another north European country and one
Latin American country (Peru, though I am probably incorrect as to
which one it is exactly) is this system present.
Maju: it is absurd from some angles. But it has the merit of
encouraging political involvement, getting the lazy yet politically
informed to vote and a government which wins always claims it won by
mandate of from the votes of over 98% of the population who is
eligable to vote, thereby making it somewhat more legitimate. Some
would claim it forces the citizenry to adopt good political and social
habits.
|
|
azimuth
Caliph
SlaYer'S SlaYer
Joined: 12-Dec-2004
Location: Neutral Zone
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2979
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 13-Sep-2005 at 04:05 |
Originally posted by Mixcoatl
Originally posted by azimuth
well it was a stupid election but still i would say its better than nothing. |
I wouldn't say that. Now there has been an election Mubarak has something to justify his dictatorship.
|
well he is 77 which means he wont stay there as much as he already did, so it could be like Spain After Franco's death.
and in this election he promised of many reforms and stuff the candidates usually do, which was something new to the egyptians and which i see as a good thing.
so still better than before and better than nothing
|
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon
Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 07:15 |
Originally posted by SearchAndDestroy
What about Afghanistan Ahmed? |
Afghanistan is not Arabic country.
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
|
|
Ahmed The Fighter
Chieftain
Lion of Babylon
Joined: 17-Apr-2005
Location: Iraq
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1106
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 12:09 |
Originally posted by ok ge
Ahmed can correct me on that, however, Iraq is a very diverse land & only democracy that will work there is a non-parliment democracy as people can directly elect their president, vice president and so...
The parlimentary democracy in Iraq is actually encouraging the current division between Shiites, Sunnies, Kurds, Turkmen, as each parliment member will represent his circle and later, they will decide the president and the prime minister based on the ethnic structure of the parliment rather than the bigger representative picture of all Iraqi people. Democracy of direct election is better than parlimentary democracy as sunni coaltaion vs Kurdi coalation vs shiite coalation and then Turkmen in one coalation too are busy in confrontation rather than implementing policies and testing people's responses and reactions. This will insure that who ever will come to the top of decision making will work to satisfy all the Iraqi sects rather than his coalation.
|
The parlimentary democracy is the best solution for our case because it let the parties to make a coalitions not like direct election each party will present his leader in the election in this case the majority will win with no doubt.
In parlimentary election maybe sunni form a coalition with shia or kurd or vice versa this type of election make the situation closer to fair deal
|
"May the eyes of cowards never sleep"
Khalid Bin Walid
|
|
ok ge
Arch Duke
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 29-Aug-2005
Location: Saudi Arabia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1775
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 13:23 |
Oh that is a good point when it comes to representing minorities.
However, the parlimentary and the coalation method of democracy usually encourages people to rally behind their sect, like Sunnis only for Sunni groups, Shiites only for Shiite groups...etc
With a direct election, you will expect the candidate to statisfy all citizens as much as he could. If he was a shiite for example, he will work to win the other 40% of the nation who are not-shiite because he cannot depend on only the 60% for sure to win. In this case, you will find Sunnis, Kurds, Shiites and all groups focusing on candidate promises rather than their backgrounds.
|
D.J. Kaufman
Wisdom is the reward for a lifetime of listening ... when youd have preferred to talk.
|
|
Maju
King
Joined: 14-Jul-2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6565
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 14:45 |
Originally posted by Constantine XI
Maju: it is absurd from some angles. But it has the merit of
encouraging political involvement, getting the lazy yet politically
informed to vote and a government which wins always claims it won by
mandate of from the votes of over 98% of the population who is
eligable to vote, thereby making it somewhat more legitimate. Some
would claim it forces the citizenry to adopt good political and social
habits.
|
Well, in a winner-takes-all electoral system like the one that I assume
you have in Australia makes even less sense because you can only choose
between the proverbial twedledee and twedledoo, so why would people
vote? At least if they could abstain they could show through their
non-participitation their dislike for the limited political choice. Yes
they can still vote blank or null but that's quite uncommon, even with
a political campaign for that behind.
|
NO GOD, NO MASTER!
|
|
Tobodai
Tsar
Retired AE Moderator
Joined: 03-Aug-2004
Location: Antarctica
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4310
|
Quote Reply
Posted: 14-Sep-2005 at 17:54 |
hey I would trade modern democracy in America (2 parties, winner takes all) for a smart educated dictator.
|
"the people are nothing but a great beast...
I have learned to hold popular opinion of no value."
-Alexander Hamilton
|
|