Axver ([info]axver) wrote,
@ 2006-01-27 23:43:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current music:'Slave Called Shiver' by Porcupine Tree
Entry tags:democracy, hypocrisy, israel, palestine, politics

Hypocrisy comes out to play.
I love watching political hypocrites expose their hypocrisy for everyone to see. In case you haven't heard, Hamas has won the democratic elections for the Palestinian Legislative Council, the legislature of the Palestinian National Authority. It seems that the same people who before the election were merrily chanting the usual line of "let's spread democracy to everyone [whether they like it or not]!" are now horrified and refuse to acknowledge the victory. Some politicians have even hinted that they won't recognise the Hamas government. Now, I'm not particularly thrilled about Hamas's victory, but let's be consistent here, folks. If you are going to claim to support the spread of democracy, then you have to handle outcomes that you don't exactly find agreeable.

It's not democracy if only the people you like and support are allowed to win.


(Post a new comment)


[info]liamtreasure
2006-01-27 02:33 pm UTC (link)
Democracy is both incredible and a bitch.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:11 am UTC (link)
I agree that it's a bitch. I don't think it's incredible; rather, I think it's a farcical popularity contest.

Shame I can't think up a practical, workable alternative.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]liamtreasure
2006-01-29 03:32 am UTC (link)
Fuck the government, just let everyone run around in anarchy!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]fbiagentwannabe
2006-01-27 04:17 pm UTC (link)
I'm not happy that Hamas even has a party (sort of like the communist party here), but I don't think it was such a wise step for everyone to so quickly condemn it. Who knows, the bark may be worse than the bight. But... if Hamas does do something stupid like openly claiming responsibility for a bombing or such -- then we can complain to our hearts content. :)

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]fbiagentwannabe
2006-01-27 09:56 pm UTC (link)
Mm... and I did mean bite. Bad me.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:20 am UTC (link)
I wholly expect Hamas to completely stuff things up - I mean, really, can you see them working even remotely well with Israel or the US? No, didn't think so. I'm going in with no expectations of anything positive, and I hope to be pleasantly surprised. Maybe the rigours of political life will teach the Hamas leadership a thing or two about the ineffectiveness of terrorism. However, Western condemnations of the Hamas government is just going to establish more animosity, which is certainly not what we need in such a delicate situation.

'sort of like the communist party here'

As much as communism's image was thoroughly tarnished in the capitalist world in the 20th century, I can't really oppose its theory that much myself. Well, the stereotypical godless Stalinist type I can, but keep in mind that my political position most closely aligns with the definition of Social Democracy, which isn't quite as far left as communism (I disagree with some of its positions) but is getting there. I suppose that's no surprise though, considering I come from New Zealand, one of the countries to pioneer the welfare state and formerly a bastion of government ownership of services and resources (while permitting private competition - hmm, sounds like a policy I've advocated on LJ before!).

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]desert_sky
2006-01-27 04:48 pm UTC (link)
Exactly -- and everyone in the Middle East can see how hypocritical it is too, and it doesn't exactly give them a positive view of the US propaganda about "democracy in the Middle East." If the Arab people want Islamic government, let them have it and see how well it works out for them. It's their own countries and governments, after all. Reminds me of how the US has tried to squelch the democratically-elected leaders of Latin American countries if, God forbid, the leaders were socialist. Never mind if the people of those countries wanted socialist leaders -- it only mattered what the US wanted!

Not to mention the incredible hypocrisy of the far-right Christians here, who would love nothing more than to set up a Christian theocracy in the US, but loathe the idea of (democratically elected) Islamic government in the Middle East. I would never vote for the Muslim Brotherhood or any party like it, but that doesn't mean that other people shouldn't be able to. That's what democracy is all about...it's just too bad some politicians can't recognize that.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:36 am UTC (link)
Yes! Really, the condemnation of the Hamas government is probably the stupidest thing they could have done. We all know that Hamas isn't exactly the world's most desirable government, but maybe having to deal with politics might teach Hamas's leaders how to seek effective resolutions to their demands. If Western governments actually want to continue to work with the Palestinians and build up trust rather than animosity, they'll try to at least be cordial. Condemning someone instantly establishes and re-inforces poor feelings. No-one's going to stop terrorist attacks or achieve much of anything by refusing to acknowledge the Hamas government.

'Reminds me of how the US has tried to squelch the democratically-elected leaders of Latin American countries if, God forbid, the leaders were socialist.'

This particularly infuriates me because, guess what? I am a social democrat! I have utterly no doubt that had New Zealand been some non-First World, non-Western country with strong US commercial interests, the US government would have undertaken some form of action, either overt or covert, against our government in the mid-20th century. But because we were a First World Western nation who was strongly aligned with the UK before WWII, we got away with things like the welfare state, government ownership of resources and services, regulation of transportation competition, and so forth. For example, if you were transporting goods over 30 miles and a railway service was available, you had to use it as laws were established to protect the railways from road competition (one of the best laws ever in my hopelessly biased railfan view). Do you think the US would have permitted a Latin American nation to elect a government whose campaign was centred around such a policy? Most certainly not!

For the record, I think that until about the 1970s, New Zealand was running one of the best governments in history, but then the Muldoon and Lange governments just had to go and wreck it. What are politicians for though, eh? At least the Lange government redeemed itself by standing up to the US and asserting New Zealand's independence from superpower bullying tactics over nuclear technology.

'Not to mention the incredible hypocrisy of the far-right Christians here, who would love nothing more than to set up a Christian theocracy in the US, but loathe the idea of (democratically elected) Islamic government in the Middle East.'

I think you've forgotten something really important here. A Christian government is holy and righteous, but all Muslims are heathen terrorists!

... the sad part is, while I may be being sarcastic, some would say that in complete seriousness. :|

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]purplicious
2006-01-27 10:03 pm UTC (link)
Indeed.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]purplicious
2006-01-27 10:03 pm UTC (link)
Profound, eh?

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]purplicious
2006-01-27 10:04 pm UTC (link)
Marvel.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:39 am UTC (link)
*stares in amazement instead of marvelling*

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]purplicious
2006-01-28 05:27 pm UTC (link)
Boooooo.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:38 am UTC (link)
GeekyEdge was in such awe of your profound comment that his icon fell out.

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]purplicious
2006-01-28 05:28 pm UTC (link)
Wow!!!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-02-02 12:31 pm UTC (link)
Wow, you get the last comment I shall make from home!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
OOOOOH, READ ME!!!!!
[info]purplicious
2006-02-03 01:57 am UTC (link)
Or maybe this will be!

(Reply to this)(Parent)(Thread)
Re: OOOOOH, READ ME!!!!!
[info]axver
2006-02-03 03:04 am UTC (link)
This was second but it gets the first reply. :)

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]screendoor3
2006-01-27 11:03 pm UTC (link)
Indeed.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:38 am UTC (link)
Yes!

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]screendoor3
2006-01-27 11:09 pm UTC (link)
Let's see if the Resistance can lead a government. I don't particularily care for either side in this conflict. Theological governments are all bad in my opinion.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:39 am UTC (link)
I think it will be interesting to see if having to run a government will teach them there are more effective ways than terrorism to achieve their goals.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

[info]laughing_shadow
2006-01-28 04:48 am UTC (link)
I think that for a lot of people 'democracy' is shorthand for 'liberal democracy', hence when elections produce illiberal outcomes they are disappointed. I can understand where they're coming from, as liberal democracy is a very different thing to pure democracy - and personally I see no merit in the tyranny of 50% + 1 where a constitutional government is not ensured and my liberty is not protected. I think the hypocrisy comes in where you start labelling governments as illegitimate for policy differences not relating to arguments over the system & function of government, i.e. I say Howard has no right to be Prime Minister because I despise his industrial relations laws. But I think Hamas's policies are not consistent with personal liberty or the rule of law and there may be some scope for legitimate complaint in that.

(Reply to this)(Thread)

[info]axver
2006-01-28 11:44 am UTC (link)
'I think that for a lot of people 'democracy' is shorthand for 'liberal democracy', hence when elections produce illiberal outcomes they are disappointed.'

This is true, and people need to be honest about that, though when I think about it, how can you ensure a liberal democracy while removing the possibility of an illiberal outcome? I don't think you can without denying freedom of choice and in the process negating what democracy is all about in the first place.

I'm certainly not thrilled that Hamas has won and there's definitely bounds for legitimate complaints, but they quite legitimately won a democratic election and refusing to acknowledge them does no good for anyone - it just adds to the animosity in the Middle East and certainly does nothing to halt terrorism. Attempting to work with the Hamas government in a normal political framework may improve relations though, and who knows, the Hamas leaders may actually realise they can more effectively achieve their objectives through political processes.

It'll be interesting to see how this plays out.

(Reply to this)(Parent)

Create an Account
Forgot your login?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…