She = Qaddafi's daughter, Aisha el-Qaddafi, who did an interview with the NYT.
She presents this critique of democracy:
In an election where one candidate won with 50 percent of the vote and another lost with 48 percent, she asked, “Do you call this democracy? Just this one vote? What happened to the 48 percent who said ‘no’?”
पोस्ट्स
१९ टिप्पण्या:
In an election where one candidate won with 50 percent of the vote and another lost with 48 percent, she asked, “Do you call this democracy? Just this one vote? What happened to the 48 percent who said ‘no’?”
Not enough available trunks to find votes in?
To answer her question, though, democracy is the worst system of government in the world...except for all the others (excluding, of course, tinpot North African dictatorships that would never deign to count something as quaint as votes in the first place).
What happened to the 48 percent who said ‘no’?”
Sounds familiar.
What happened to the 48 percent who said ‘no’?”
Easy..
They didn't accept the results and called for recounts and recalls.
She has a point there. In Wisconsin the 48% riot and disrupt the government's functions until another election.
Illegal immigrants from Africa are already pouring into Europe, and I believe that Hamas in Gaza would certainly qualify as "Islamic radicals" with "a base on the Mediterranean's shores." That's two out of three with 'Daffy still in place. Libyan tribes turning their guns on each other? Sounds like a local problem to me.
None of the three outcomes she mentions sound so dire that it's worth it to leave 'Daffy in power. Then again, it's not like President Obama is showing a whole lot of gumption in regard to taking him out. They must not have taught Sun Tzu at Harvard.
Clyde...The engineered stalemate keeps Qaddafi in place surrounded by a civil war so that world oil prices can spike for long enough to re-crash the US economy. Drilling permits in the Alaska and Gulf off shore bonanzas are still denied, " because they would have no effect for several years", which has been the story for year after year after year. At least Donald Trump has never made his Billions by cleverly manipulating the oil markets.
She's right about the tribes...of Wisconsin.
And in a dictatorship, what happens to the 99.99% who say, "No"? Ugly as it can be at times, this is what democracy looks like. She sounds like a whiny Wisconsin teacher.
"Just this one vote? What happened to the 48 percent who said ‘no’?”
Why am I not surprised that the offspring of Qaddafi doesn't understand the notion of society working through things and evaluating where to compromise and what to not give in on? Obviously to the totalitarian minded, there is no such process; there's only dictating the course of a nation.
Nobody said it wasn't ugly or at times chaotic. The question is, what is just. Yeah, Democracy is inherently the most unjust system of government ever... save for all the others. But at least democratic citizens know this and realize they usually won't be shot for working to change things.
Unlike in certain other nations.
I think the key, that some outside of democratic societies don't understand well, it that our leaders serve for a limited time and that they relinquish power when they lose an election. Washington set the example for the United States.
It's not an easy concept for those who would live in societies where the norm is to hold on to power at all costs.
What happened to the 48% who voted "no" sadly seems like a legitimate question in the age of Obama, who clearly sees himself as representing and being responsible only to his supporters.
However, our republic was created to prevent a tyranny of the majority. Those 48% have their rights respected by and their interests protected by the winners, and they bide their time to the next election to try and get the candidate whose issues more closely track theirs into power.
And if they are successful, the new winning politician will be expected to respect and represent the losers as well as the winners.
I hope Libyan tribes drum better than their pasty counterparts in Wisconsin.
She is striking. Perhaps Vogue or Vanity Fair can do an expose on her like they did with Forehead Assad's fashionable spouse.
Although her point is valid. Col. Q is a known entity and right up to the current troubles was being courted by us and the Euros and bragging about what a 'reformer' his son is/was. Hell they were saying the same damn things about Assad.
I wonder if anyone saw that Diane Swayer lap dance of an interview she gave Assad a year or so ago. She was practically gushing when talking about him meeting his wife and discussing what kind of groovy music he has on his Ipod. Now he's gunning down the opposition with the same fervor his old man had.
Considering none of these countries have any experience with democratic rule or the concept of political tolerance, you'll have to forgive me if I don't get tingles over the Arab spring.
She just made the argument for not allowing the vote to naturalized citizens from dictatorship countries.
I thought illegal immigrants from Africa were already pouring into Europe.
But, then, she is an unimpeachable source.
You know, this actually isn't a bad critique of African democracy, with its "one man, one vote, one time" approach. But you'd think a Libyan would have looked at how it works in, oh, Italy, and noticed that it's had 61 governments in 66 years.
Not democracy.
Representative republic with a constitution that limits government powers and explicitly protects individual rights.
How juvenile.
Democracy is a check on power. When democracy works it's because elections limit the power of the elite.
Of course the elite doesn't like this.
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा