Yes. I think that the law is wrong, unfair and Unconstitutional.Which law am I talking about? I'll explain a bit 1st. It is currently illegal in Kuwait to hold Primaries before an election (i.e. inte5abaat far3iya).
I think banning them violates our right to freedom of speech and our right to freedom of assembly.
If you think the US democracy is a good model, then isn't what Obama and Clinton doing nothing other than "inte5abaat far3iya"?
If you tell me that it should be banned to prevent tribal voting and sectarian voting, I say to you, who do you think you are to tell people how to vote?
If people want to vote to a tribes-man. LET THEM BE.
If they want to vote to an extremist sectarian cleric, LET THEM BE.
Trying to control other people's ideas is called "Wesaya Fikriyah". The voters are dumb? so what, we already know that. mo sheghlek what they vote for or why. The "Masses are Asses" its been said before. This is Democracy. Is Democracy wrong? I don't necessarily love it, but I'm giving it a chance. I believe that: "innama yowalla 3alaikom minkom". Regardless of the method of selection. be it democracy or hereditary rule.
Whatever your "perfect" candidate should look/think like, if you had the choice to choose between 3-4 of these "perfect" candidates, wouldn't you rather hold primaries (your own far3iya) within your circles who share your ideology to make sure that all of "your people" concentrate your votes to back only a certain few to make sure they WIN?
This activity is being done ANYWAY since we first started having elections. Before election day we go around the dowaween to ask the guys who are they going to vote for, and get news from the other diwaniyat and try to figure out which of "our" candidates has the wider support, so we can all back him and insure his victory.
Primaries are:
- Unstoppable (its silly to lay a law that is un-enforcable)
- Useful
- A pretty Sophisticated form of organization that we should be proud of, not ban.
They also ruin the plans of some candidates who only put out their names for nomination in hopes that the other "strong" ones will give them a monetary "bail-out" offer. Sleaze bags.
The LAW in this case is WRONG. agolha belfam ilmalyan.
Don't succumb to the mentality of "we like democracy as long as it produces people we like".
I'm not a bdewe, and it is not in my best interest to have a higher presentation % of tribal MPs belmajles. but.. what's wrong is wrong. and what's right is right.
Ma yse7 illa essa7ee7.
12 comments:
I agree.
Oh, but I have to add, the way they are reacting to that law in a very uncivilized way;\
I hate the elections..that's all I can say
amethyst: true, but still, people don't like it when they think they're being oppressed. to them they were going to "rescue their fellow candidates" from unfair arrest. gotta empathize too :P
big pearls: yam3awda a7san min ghairna who don't have a say in anything. il7emdella alf.
Hmm, I didn't see it that way, but you have a good point. I only believe they're going about it the wrong way, whatever it is they're doing.
None the less like you said, these are elections, and the people choose who they like. It is the people's fault if they choose wrongly.
انا مع الفرعيات، لكن مو بالشكل اللي اشوفه اهني، انا ضد الاختيار بسبب العرق وليس الفكر.
الفرعيات وسيلة لضمان النجاح لكن اذا تم استخدامها بشكل خاطئ مثل القبائل عندنا، انا اشوفه غلط.
يعني ابي اشوف فرعيات على شكل احزاب مو قبائل!
وعلى فكرة كلامك صح، هذة الديموقراطية، والمشكلة فينا مو فيها.
Honestly I never liked the law since it came out in 1998. I totally agree w/ you it is freedom of assembly, they're pracicaly criminalizing thought.
It was used unfairly and unjustly when it 1st came out. But it is the product of an old parliament taht came out with it which goes back to unfair representation of the people's will
http://www.aljarida.com/AlJarida/Article.aspx?id=52552
i'd say what the artical writer have to say
first of all i was very saddened to read this post. never thought you would have that opinion, but its yours to have. there is a big difference between the primaries in the states and what is happening here. in the states they also have caucus were they all sit and debate who deserves winning, not because of the color of his/her skin nor because of his/her family name.
you said who are you to tell them what to do? well i beg to differ. if you see a racist activity taking place, would not want to stop it? "elentekhabat il far3eya" is purely racist. they choose people according to family names, non of the people outside the tribe are included, and women do not vote. why do they do that? because they want this particular parlement member to help them first. y3ni kuwait comes second. they want this parlement member to benefit them as a tribe. that is purely and utterly unacceptable in a civilized country. furthermore, you said "yowala 3laykom kheyarkom" if you believe in that how can you believe that something racist is okay just because some people want it? who said that was democracy, yes democracy does not make you think what others want, but should prevent such uncivilized activities.
if a lot of people or even many tribes believe that what they are doing is right that does not mean they are correct. their high numbers does not justify their wrong thinking. even with the same tribes they have differences. one of them has higher numbers than the other and demands that 2 instead of just one of them runs, regardless of the quality. also if i was in that district and wanted to vote for the right person i wont be able to do so because he was voted off before the elections according to his family name, nothing to do with his qualities again.
this law is stoppable, it may need years, but is stoppable, and the government is finally doing its job. and you can read what is happening at the moment. finally, a law that protects the minority,and prevents racism is not a WRONG law.
ya3ni shagol akthar?
gilt elli eb baaleey KELLAH!
SHOKRAN
Intikhabat far3iya endanger our entire political system, it is in fact a corruption of it.
As Thomas Jefferson (the original supporter of democracy) once said about democracy: "Only the educated should vote"
When you have "masses of asses" voting, especially in the case of Kuwait and its sectarian primaries, you see that majority rules. And the majority is unfortunately either ignorant in masla7at deerat'hom oo sha3abhom or indifferent towards everything but themselves and their family. When you have these people in power, they will manipulate the law and abuse their power in order to benefit themselves and their people, without regard for the consequences of what they do. Thus the very concept of election primaries will weaken our nationalism and divide us further, not to mention ruin our country more with blatant instances of nepotism, corruption, and racism.
I agree wholeheartedly that people should be free to vote for who they believe will do the best job at their post, but then again these election primaries are held in order to coerce individuals to vote for a few chosen members of their relavent political faction/tribal affiliation. So in essence, they are not voting by their own will, but rather by what the tribal leaders have decided.
We choose who we think will be best for our country and our fellow Kuwaities. Unfortunately, the majority choose who they thing will be best for their family/their future/ their tribe.
Finally I conclude with this: the ideaology of "pure democracy"- in which all citizens are able to vote- comes with the naive and idealic assumption that citizens of a given country are loyal to their country first. Sadly for many in Kuwait this is far from true.
Post a Comment