Democracy's Double Standard

THE day before Iran's ninth presidential elections last June, President Bush sent a discouraging message to potential voters. Iran's electoral process "ignores the basic requirements of democracy," Mr. Bush declared, and these elections would be "sadly consistent" with the country's "oppressive record." For Iranians, there was no mistaking the American president's point: he was tacitly sanctioning the call that some Iranian exiles and activists had issued for an election boycott, based on exactly this logic.

An American administration that had called on other Middle Eastern populaces to vote in flawed elections greeted the Iranian electoral process with nothing but open disdain. It is worth revisiting this odd judgment call at a time when Hamas's victory in the Palestinian elections has raised even more questions about Washington's confused strategy of democracy promotion.

In Iran last June, the call for a boycott resonated with frustrated and apathetic voters. Many, if not most, moderates and reform advocates stayed home from the polls. And we all know what followed: the philosophy-loving moderate, Mohammad Khatami, was replaced as president by a radical militant, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad — a former military commander who presides over one of the most extreme governments post-revolutionary Iran has yet had.

That's right: with what appeared to be the endorsement of President Bush and dozens of American-backed satellite television channels that broadcast in Farsi, the disillusioned young people of Iran effectively took one of the world's most closely watched nuclear programs out of the hands of a reformer and placed it into the hands of a hard-line reactionary.

Can anyone now doubt that Iranian elections, however flawed, really do matter? When Mr. Khatami came to power, his declared goals were to establish the rule of law, demand equal rights for all citizens and reconcile Iran with the world.

The writer teaches at Tehran University, do you expect him to write a fair piece when hes under the watch of one of the most brutal dictatorships in the world? To compare the Palestinian elections which were monitored by world bodies and free and fair to Iran's dictatorship run election is ridiculous.

Here's a piece from my recent article on Iran:

Yes, Iran does have elections. These elections are a facade behind which manipulations of power are concealed. In an article in the National Review Online, pro-Democracy students Bahman Batmanghelidj and Kamal Azari point out that even if seventy percent of the people vote for pro-democracy candidates, “clerical hard-liners ignore the voice of the voters and continue to use their power to veto, repress, and crush even a few modest efforts at a political opening”. Anyone seeking to run for the presidency of Iran must first be examined by a hard-line group of twelve clerics. During the recent election, the Guardian Council disqualified over ninety-eight percent of the candidates, including all female candidates and virtually every single reformist. The seven candidates that made it past the Council were all Islamists loyal to the Islamic dictatorship. A dictatorship where all authority is vested in an un-elected ‘Supreme Leader’, currently Ayatollah Khamenei. Hence, although the Iranian government has elections, these elections are used as a propaganda tool directed towards the naïve rather than a tool of democracy . A recent poll conducted by pro-Democracy students in Iran shows that the current President of Iran enjoys the support of about twenty percent of the Iranian populace, likewise over eighty percent of the Iranian student body supports a secular democratic government.

Washington's confused strategy of democracy promotion.

This article is a full blown manifestation of cultural relativism. Iran's electoral process is not a full expression of the will of the Iranian people. Iran's constitution makes clear the Iranian moral, ideological and political compass is under the command of an unelected few. It is an injustice to consider the Iranian state a democracy. President Bush is, as are Americans, fully aware of what democracy is and therefore promote true democracy. The confusion about what democracy is exists among those who control millions through despotism and is better described as willful ignorance.

DEMOCRACY: Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives. This does not even remotely describe Iran.

IRAN’S CONSTITUTION - Article 110 - Following are the duties and powers of the Supreme Leadership:

Delineation of the general policies of the Islamic Republic of Iran after consultation with the Nation's Exigency Council.
Supervision over the proper execution of the general policies of the system.
Issuing decrees for national referenda.
Assuming supreme command of the armed forces.
Declaration of war and peace, and the mobilization of the armed forces.
Appointment, dismissal, and acceptance of resignation of:
1. the fuqaha' on the Guardian Council.
2. the supreme judicial authority of the country.
3. the head of the radio and television network of the Islamic Republic of Iran.
4. the chief of the joint staff.
5. the chief commander of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps.
6. the supreme commanders of the armed forces.
Resolving differences between the three wings of the armed forces and regulation of their relations.
Resolving the problems, which cannot be solved by conventional methods, through the Nation's Exigency Council.
Signing the decree formalizing the election of the President of the Republic by the people. The suitability of candidates for the Presidency of the Republic, with respect to the qualifications specified in the Constitution, must be confirmed before elections take place by the Guardian Council;, and, in the case of the first term [of the Presidency], by the Leadership;
Dismissal of the' President of the Republic, with due regard for the interests of the country, after the Supreme Court holds him guilty of the violation of his constitutional duties, or after a vote of the Islamic Consultative Assembly testifying to his incompetence on the basis of Article 89 of the Constitution.
Pardoning or reducing the sentences of convicts, within the framework of Islamic criteria, on a recommendation [to that effect] from the Head of judicial power. The Leader may delegate part of his duties and powers to another person.

Democracy is, has always been, and will remain MOB RULE..
Sharia law is MOB RULE too.. its all in the MOB we're talking about as to the character of democracy.. Monarchy is also democracy just a different kind of MOB RULE with an abbrevated MOB... thats ruling.. Rule by MOBSTERS is what democracy IS.. And parasiting "the people" is what it does.. many variations but always the same result..

The U.S.A. is ruled by two MOBS.. with a kind of Mob etiquette.. unless there is a HIT going on.. makes the U.S.A. a democracy and not a republic at all, the way it once was..

Funny that there are three words NOT present in the U.S. Constitution ANYWHERE..
1) democracy..
2) democratic..
3) democrat..

NOWHERE..... WHY IS THAT?...

U.S. CONSTITUTION, PREAMBLE: We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Although there are multiple interpretations of the U.S. Constitution, it is an amazingly consistent document. It ensures the people of the United States are afforded all of the ingredients that could help the nation thrive democratically. Indeed, God gives Americans the right to behave democratically! This is not true in Iran. Iran's constitution contradicts itself and so do the behaviors of Iranian officials. In Iran Allah is opposed to democratic behavior. There are no freedoms that would make democracy possible in Iran.

Your comment strikes me as odd. The definition of any given word is important. No Sir! Monarchy is not democracy. Theocracy is not democracy. Dictatorship is not democracy. It helps no one to obfuscate the meanings of words... That is unless you want to generate synonyms to suit a prefabricated agenda. The Iranian government regularly claims American freedoms are satanic hegemony. Freedom and tyranny are synonyms to the tyrants of Tehran. Whereas they may be able to convince a few Iranians of such nonsense, most Americans can see these obfuscations for what they are, antonyms.

[ It ensures the people of the United States are afforded all of the ingredients that could help the nation thrive democratically. ]

WRONG.. democractically is used NOWHERE in that instrument.. America must thrive republically or become a democracy.. You know, soverign states vs. conquered provinces (like Canada)..

Consider:......
Remember, democracy never lasts long. It soon wastes, exhausts, and murders itself. There never was a democracy yet that did not commit suicide. – John Adams (1814)

Democracy is the road to socialism. Karl Marx

Democracy is indispensable to socialism. The goal of socialism is communism. V.I. Lenin

The meaning of peace is the absence of opposition to socialism.- Karl Marx

NOTE: Democracy BREEDS socialism... Socialism is just a symptom of democracy.. -AND- socialism is slavery by government.. ALWAYS.. Democracy is MOB RULE.. that NEEDS socialism (which is a "protection scheme" by mobsters).. You know, like the Mafia.. Democrats and Big government republicans are Mafiosi..

WRONG.. democractically is used NOWHERE in that instrument.. America must thrive republically or become a democracy.. You know, soverign states vs. conquered provinces (like Canada)..

I'm curious. Where are you going with this? If I understand your assertion, “the U.S. Constitution defines the American government as a mafia”? I don't think so. Setting aside your opinion for a moment, any healthy electorate has freedom of the press, freedom of assembly, freedom of religion and freedom to travel. The American electorate has these things and the Iranian electorate does not. Why would a Mafia support a system in which its subjects have the freedom to peacefully organize an alternative to it? In Iran there is no political alternative to Valeyat e-Faqhee. Peaceful challenges to it lead to incarceration, torture and execution. Despite the despotism the Iranian government represents, Iran's government is still not a mafia, it is a totalitarian dictatorship.

The word democracy [with a small d – as opposed to Democrats, a political party] as it is used by Americans, implies political and social freedoms. In this context both Adams and Marx are wrong. Democracy is not the road to socialism nor is it a road to self destruction. Indeed it is used as a synonym with liberty and freedom these days. The U.S. Constitution guarantees American freedom but does not need to explicitly use the word democracy. Socialism is associated to very different concepts in America. That said, there are a number of socialistic policies American governors have set up over the years to foster the pursuit of liberty and happiness for Americans. The Rural Electrification Act was one example, Anti-Monopolization Laws and Social Security are other examples…

Despite your Anti-American opinions about the United States, it is clear that the Iranian electorate is not free therefore Iran cannot be a democracy. President Bush was absolutely right to call Iran’s electoral process a sham. This NYT author appears to know as little about the differences between what American a saying when they say democracy as you do. But between you and me, that’s ok. Between the two of us, we can figure out what we’re both talking about and why we think it's important if we try…

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.