OMG! Mubarak wins in election shocker!

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Spiffor
You have absolutely no idea what progress these contested elections brought.

For the first time in Egypt, there were several candidates.

For a fake election. Whoop-de-doo.

As to the rigged part, I'm not sure the election was any more rigged than in any other nascent democracy. Keep in mind that the major opposition parties boycotted the election (hence the 27% participation only). And in my experience, I've seen often enough 80%+ scores in a democratic system whose population was still completely unused of democracy.

"completely unused to democracy" (read: their vote was fixed through intimidation or simple corruption)

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
For a fake election. Whoop-de-doo.

Read the Beeb's article I linked to. You'll see what changes even that fake election could bring to the Egyptian political life.
But if you ain't interested in facts, but only in your little rethoric, I won't interfere anymore.

"completely unused to democracy" (read: their vote was fixed through intimidation or simple corruption)

To be honest, the 80%+ scores I've seen were in internal votes in the French Communist Party. The PCF was the last stalinist party of western Europe, and operated a 180° turn in the early 1990's, as the USSR was suddenly (and sincerely) harshly criticized. The PCF attempted to completely change its image in one swoop. Among other things, the structures were overhauled, and the PCF is now the French party that has the best internal democratic process, after the Greens. The leaders are very serious about changing the party, so they don't rig the election.

Not that they need to rig them. The base members of the PCF have yet to adapt to the climate of internal democracy. For decades, they had to follow the line of the party, or to leave the party entirely. We do have vocal ranters within the party, but we also have a broad membership that continues to follow suggestions of the leadership. I can think of only one time where the suggestions of the leadership was actually threatened by the voters.

[Kuciwalker]

Read the Beeb's article I linked to. You'll see what changes even that fake election could bring to the Egyptian political life.
But if you ain't interested in facts, but only in your little rethoric, I won't interfere anymore.

Your the one who cited the English as an example of a progressing democracy. They didn't follow this pattern at all.

The difference, here, is that they have the appearence of democracy out of touch of the substance. In England they matched up better.

To be honest, the 80%+ scores I've seen were in internal votes in the French Communist Party. The PCF was the last stalinist party of western Europe, and operated a 180° turn in the early 1990's, as the USSR was suddenly (and sincerely) harshly criticized. The PCF attempted to completely change its image in one swoop. Among other things, the structures were overhauled, and the PCF is now the French party that has the best internal democratic process, after the Greens. The leaders are very serious about changing the party, so they don't rig the election.

There's a difference between an internal party election and a national election.

[Az]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
For that matter, Iran is more democratic than this.

If we make the premise of "democracy = free society", then this is definetly wrong.

[Kuciwalker]

Yes, and if we make the premise of "communism = Stalinism", then all y'all are pwned.

[Spiffor]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker
There's a difference between an internal party election and a national election.

Not when the election is boycotted by pretty much all of those who disagree. There was 23% participation. That's nothing.

[Kuciwalker]

So you're saying that the Egyptian elections are pretty much just internal party elections, and so don't have anything to do with democracy on the national scale?

[Az]

And you diss Aggie.

How do you define democracy? if there is an election without people forcing people to vote, that's already democratic?

voting system is an important part of democracy, but isn't most of it, by far.

[Kuciwalker]

Yes it is. It's the definition of democracy.

[Az]

No. Even by the dictionary defintion it isn't.

[Kuciwalker]

de·moc·ra·cy Pronunciation Key (d-mkr-s)
n. pl. de·moc·ra·cies

1. Government by the people, exercised either directly or through elected representatives.
2. A political or social unit that has such a government.
3. The common people, considered as the primary source of political power.
4. Majority rule.
5. The principles of social equality and respect for the individual within a community.[/q]

Iran get's a score of 4/5. Egypt, on the other hand, gets 0, or maybe 1/5.

[Az]

Come on, that's not how it works. You don't give score according to the dictionary defintion, especially since 1,3 are the same thing, 4 is a version of that and 2 is unrelated ( name of the regime, and not a part of the things that describe it) .

[Kuciwalker]

The last one is liberal democracy. Liberal democracy is a subset of democracy. Iran just isn't a liberal democracy.

[Az]

Yeah, and Egypt just isn't an electional democracy.

[Kuciwalker]

Egypt isn't a democracy any more than Iraq.