ELECTIONS

I often thought who Iranians would vote for in case they had a democracy. And we know who the members of the first Iranian parliament in the first decade of the 20th century were. They were mostly the clergy. Good for them! Iranians, would naturally vote for Shia Islam, even today. Hey, scream and shout that our compatriots are some idiots!? No! We may be idiots for thinking that we are right and they are wrong. The reality is out there. Don't like it? Go and find the society you fit in! God created us free, right? What would Iranians vote for today? I know that most Iranians are pretty much fed up with this regime, but what would they vote for? I think they would still vote for some hypocrite, mostly an Islamist one.

Just a few days ago I was just thinking about the current electoral process that is undergoing in the US, and comparing it to Iran. I was comparing Americans to Iranians. America is the oldest ongoing (continuous) democracy (Britain is a 'democratic' Monarchy if we may say so) and they are some of the most prepared peoples in democratic affairs. But it is so amazing that the average American voter (that means the vast majority) is not much different an idiot than the average Iranian voter. While the Iranian voter votes for an Islamist hypocrite who pretty much says nothing while lying about the most basic realities of the world, the American voter votes for a Christian who is just a bit more careful in his lies (because of the continuous harsh scrutiny by opposing media channels), though still pretty much saying nothing! Let's look at how things are! We have two front-runners (almost), Clinton for the Democrats and McCain for the Republicans. Why do their voters so whole-heartedly vote for one or the other? I am honestly curious to know. What has Clinton promised to do? What are her views? What is she saying really? What about McCain?

I looked at their programs. They say nothing concrete. If they are saying anything concrete, most of what they are saying are vague, irrelevant, impossible, or purely preposterous. And I actually found more (relatively) concrete statements and programs from McCain and much less concrete stuff from Clinton. Democrats are well-known for talking a lot and saying absolutely nothing at the end. When you go to their rallies and gatherings, you can only be sure that you will see smiles, behind which lies are abound. Republicans are somewhat more open and blunt in what they say and believe. But, in the end, people actually vote for candidates who talk a lot and say nothing. This goes for both Democrats and Republicans. It is not true to say that people do not have other choices. No! People do not want choices, they just want to vote for someone who can talk a lot, and say nothing. And this is indeed what most people want! And it is what they get.

Compare George Bush and Ahmadinejad! They were both elected by people, George Bush somewhat more fairly than Ahmadinejad. Look at their promises and their actions! Neither Bush nor Ahmadinejad promised much, but they didn't even do much for that little vague stuff they did promise. Ahmadinejad was voted because he knew how to lie well and talk a lot while saying nothing, and look like a good guy who respects Shia Islam and adheres to it, while Bush was elected because he looked like a good Christian who knew to talk a lot while saying nothing. However, the difference (as just mentioned) is that America has democratic institutions that are functional while Iran has defunct institutions that serve the politician in power, the most powerful one.

Why don't people wake up and vote for policies and programs and follow the rulers carefully to see whether they uphold their promises or not? I am not very sure about the possible reasons, but I can say that most probably hate is at play. Hate is the missing word in the nature of true politics. Hate blinds voters so much they don't read, listen or think. They just vote against someone they hate! People vote someone because they hate the other one, without having good faith and looking to see what they actually say, because most often they saying nothing. People vote for Clinton because they hate Republican conservatism, while Republicans vote for McCain because they hate Democratic liberalism (they don't even know what liberalism means).

People don't even listen to see the none-sense these politicians are saying. I did listen to every one of them. One did stand out, and it was Huckabee, simply I heard one PROGRAM (a no-meaning word in politics) he had; to abolish the IRS. That sounded very nice to me and something that could have very good results. But, amazingly, those who actually voted for him, did what they did because they hated liberalism and they thought Mike Huckabee would be the best Christian Evangelical conservative among all Republicans. Most of his voters had no idea about his tax policies. God, damn! Such idiots! Please don't get it personally. I don't really mean it :)

And why they voted for Huckabee? Because they hated liberals so much. All they heard Huckabee say was Jesus Christ, our Lord! Why did others vote for Obama or Clinton and not Huckabee? Because they hated so much Christian conservatism, they didn't care listening to see what they said. So, they neither listened to Obama, nor Clinton, nor McCain, nor Huckabee. They just voted AGAINST some ideology, or perceived belief, they hated really badly.

This is politics. It's bullshit (excuse my French) and hypocrisy all over it! It is the same in Iran, and it is the same in America, though Iranian one is not based on democratic and functional institutions while the American one actually works so that hypocrite rulers (pretty much every and each one of them) do not hold on to unconditional and unchecked power. That is the case for the US and that is the case for Iran, and anywhere else. But why is the US doing so well and why is Iran doing so poorly? They are both supposed to have some incompetent rulers who say, and do, pretty much nothing, right? It is simple, because while American rulers are under continuous scrutiny by the media and the judiciary (especially the media usually serving the opposing ideology), the Iranian rulers control the media and the judiciary.

So, although both American and Iranian rulers are pretty much nothing but some hypocrites, American rulers do nothing in general while they enjoy the goodies of power, Iranian rulers do a lot in order to keep their goodies flowing while they are alive, therefore doing lots of damages. That's all they do really, which is not so bad as such, but it is far worse in the process by preventing average Iranians pursuing their own goals, personal or social. This is why we are doing so badly and Americans doing so well.

Rulers in societies that are, or pretend to be, democratic, are best kept at bay under continuous check so that normal people, businessmen, parents, just every single citizen of the country, can get on with their lives without state interference. And the judiciary, independent of political hypocrisy, is supposed to make sure that one citizen's liberties do not collide with another citizen's liberties. Therefore some sort of justice is served. And all this must be under the close supervision of a strong and non-political (no state control involved) media so that corruption gets publicised.

What America has achieved has been this; the creation and protection of the fundamental institutions to keep politicians under control, through an independent judiciary and an independent press. And it actually works okay, just okay. All it does, from a philosophical point of view, is that two evils, some who hate the socialists (pretending to be liberals) while others who hate conservatives, never really get so much power to annihilate the other while doing their dirty work every now and then when they are in power. That is life.

However we shall not brandish every and each politician as such, because there are enough decent and caring politicians out there. I did kind of generalise the whole process, but there are individuals who are different every now and then but they often stand very little chance of being elected. And I am not talking about Ron Paul here. His programs are naive, populist and unworkable.

Nothing is perfect, though US imperfection has succeeded to serve the US citizens far better than what is supposed to be the rule of God in Iran, oh yeah! Let's hope that we as Iranians do our best so our own Iranian Islamic Republic, for the sake of the vast majority of moderate Muslim Iranians, makes a better environment in which hating parties can vote against each other and at the end none of them can plunder so much for so long at the expense of the country. And to do this we need stable and democratic institutions. An independent media is very important in order to follow and check to see that hypocrites stay hypocrites as their voters like and do not turn into thugs sticking to their administrative and political positions.

It is also important to be tolerant, not turning hate into violence. But it is quite difficult to imagine Khomeini's republic becoming tolerant to others. We all know how tolerant Khomeini was even to his friends who dared disagreeing with him. If only he hated them but be more tolerant and let them create their own political parties, Iran would have already become a flourishing prosperous country.�