Disenfranchisement

February 3, 2005 11:25 AM

Elections on the US model? Now that the voting is done, questions are starting to arise . . . Sunni Moslems in Kirkuk had an exemption from the boycott of the vote. But of 38 designated polling centres in the Hawija district, only 19 actually opened, and the electoral commission had only sent 50,000 ballots to the district, even though more than 100,000 voters were on the rolls. Of course, things like that happen often in places new to voting, like Ohio. But wait, there's more! Kurdish Christians were not able to vote when balloting materials arrived inexplicably late, and Iraq's interim president said a shortage of ballots at some polling places may have kept tens of thousands from voting. There's been a lot of news about suspicious elections all over the world during the last few years. How can we restore our faith in the democratic process?
posted by kyrademon (81 comments total)

I'll answer your question. The US can make it an imperative to fix our own voting infrastructure and to figure out how to make it perfect and perfectly transparent. Then we can demonstrate it and become an example to the rest of the world as to how it is done. Then we can export our systems and help other countries to adopt it.

It would seem that a country that is willing to pay $200B and kill many thousands of people to export democracy would be well along that road already, but sadly we are not.

If we have to live with a Bible thumping hawkish 'patriot' of a president for four years can we at least solidify the fundamental component of our government and have real elections?
posted by n9 at 11:40 AM on February 3, 2005

Restore faith in the democratic process? What on earth makes you think politicians want that?

But, to answer your question anyway, they want my trust? Open up the election process and make it transparent from end to end, make it verifiable, repeatable and completely and openly honest.

Remove partisan controls from election reviews and get Diebold out of the damned picture once and for all.

That'd be a start.

On preview: what n9 said.
posted by fenriq at 11:41 AM on February 3, 2005

Politics has become too much of a profession these days. We need more 'normal' people in it - not just the usual elite, power maniacs and lawyers.

On the other side: people in the middle east have to relearn democracy again and how to 'use' it. You hardly can establish the parlimentary tradition and continuity of the british House of Commons in the middle east over night.

But look at the Ukraine - some young democracies seem to get it - and people are willing to fight for it. Some older systems like the USA could use some updates from newer systems like the German one.

So not all is lost for Democracy.
posted by homodigitalis at 11:44 AM on February 3, 2005

and people are willing to fight for it....

and therein lies the problem with America. We'll whine to each other about it online and at the water cooler, but we won't take to the streets.
posted by twiggy at 11:55 AM on February 3, 2005

people in the middle east have to relearn democracy again

Wouldn't this presuppose that they have had knowledge of a democracy before? And not just what it feels like to have a democracy stomp your ass?
posted by fenriq at 11:56 AM on February 3, 2005

Holding out for a "perfect election process" makes as much sense as sitting and waiting for a perpetual motion machine to come along: no such animal could ever feasibly exist, not even in theory. Most whining about the quality of American elections strikes me as a combination of partisan bitter lemons, constitutional ignorance and childish utopianism, and when I hear all this talk about "normal people" and "the usual elite" I cringe. I fully expect this thread to generate plenty of heat - mostly of the Bush-bashing variety - and very little light, and I have to ask what exactly all this has to do with the "best of the web"; couldn't you just have posted it to DKos or something?
posted by Goedel at 11:56 AM on February 3, 2005

Arrow's theorem only applies to the sort of elections where one ranks choices by preference. That may not be the correct way to do an election, although it seems pretty reasonable.
posted by sonofsamiam at 11:59 AM on February 3, 2005

Goedel, arguing that something is theoretically impossible to make perfect is even less useful than arguing for improvements that we can make in what you see as an ineffective medium.

There are concrete problems with our election system that can easily be solved with very real, practicable modifications. One idea: Paper receipts for everything. This is a standard our financial transactions are held to, yet our election machinery is moving in the opposite direction. In this case, it's not some theorem at work, it's just stupidity. It's correctable, but only if people know why it's a problem, and that it isn't inevitable or unavoidable.
posted by odinsdream at 12:05 PM on February 3, 2005

Some Just Voted for Food

"I'll vote because I can't afford to have my food ration cut...if that happened, me and my family would starve to death."
posted by dinsdale at 12:08 PM on February 3, 2005

"people in the middle east have to relearn democracy again"

People in the Metafilter need psychotherapy to address their hatred of everything good done by the United States.
posted by ParisParamus at 12:14 PM on February 3, 2005

I knew this - or something like it - was going to happen, when it was reported that they'd printed 60 million ballots for a country with only 14M eligible voters.

Gotta leave it to Rove and the big boys - they never go for those half-measures...
posted by vhsiv at 12:16 PM on February 3, 2005

dinsdale, that's one way to get out the vote. Vote or Die! Who's the compassionate conservative?

Paris, like starving a half million Iraqi children because of sanctions meant to hurt Saddam? That's good? Dude, you're not even very good at trolling anymore.

vhsiv, not half measures, just half-wits!
posted by fenriq at 12:17 PM on February 3, 2005

fenriq - thanks, for the clarification...
posted by vhsiv at 12:24 PM on February 3, 2005

@ fenriq: Relearning? No. Iraq as well as Iran had democratic parliments/elected officials before Saddam and the Shah/Mullahs.
posted by homodigitalis at 12:27 PM on February 3, 2005

People in the Metafilter need psychotherapy to address their hatred of everything good done by the United States.

Pray tell - what great things have we done lately?

As I see it, our country was first inhabited and taken over by committing mass genocide.

Then we enslaved a race so we could build it up.

Then after we "freed" them, we made them drink from their own water fountains so they wouldn't dirty us.

Then we fought a war in Vietnam that made no sense and was completely and utterly unsuccessful.

Then at a time of peace, we did jack squat to reverse the damage we were starting to do to the environment - to the point that in my city, Chicago, we have a pollution warning today, in the winter, for the first time EVER - where you're not supposed to do anything outdoors that requires heavy exertion because there's too much crap in the air.

Then we invaded a country on false pretenses (Weapons of Mass Destruction, connections to Al Qaeda) and once it was exposed that both pretenses were completely bogus, we claimed it was to "liberate a people" -- very well illustrated to be a side benefit back when WMD and Al Qaeda were the prevailing arguments.

Then once we got there we killed far more civilians than "insurgents", lost 1500 American lives and counting, and found ourselves doing nothing but stirring up more hatred for this country by pretty much every other country out there.

Then when the Tsunami disaster occurred, we showed our undying generosity by offering a whopping $36 million - and only after the press said "$36 million? are you kidding? the US is offering less than other countries and corporations out there!" - we finally turned around and offered more to save face.


So we had one good day in Iraq where the voting went with less violence than we thought, and better turnout than we thought. Big deal - we were extremely pessimistic about it and now that it wasn't a completely atrocious failure you expect me to jump for joy and revel in how spectacularly we have done in this war?

Wait a few days - because already today the papers are saying that we might be a little too optimistic and happy about the way the voting went. Already they're saying we may have overestimated actual turnout, and already they're saying that lots of planned voting booths never opened - depriving many iraqis of their newfound right to vote.


I'm no bleeding heart liberal, and I don't wake up every day crying that we slaughtered the native americans and enslaved the african americans - though maybe I should. I realize that I was born long after any of that happened, and I cannot blame myself. However, it's hard to sit and watch someone like you make a statement about people "hating everything good done by the United States" - when we don't even know if this one thing is even going to turn out good.

I know you're a republican and you support George Bush and I'll never change that. Go and and keep being that. I also know you'll never acknowledge the truth about the roots of this country, and instead you'll spout off things about the "American Way" and the "American Dream". Still, I'll at least put some truth out there for you. Maybe eventually you'll get it.

America owes the world a little more than junk pop culture and McDonald's, and if we don't give it, Karma is going to come back and bite this country in the ass HARD. It looks like it's already starting.
posted by twiggy at 12:31 PM on February 3, 2005

OK Twiggy. Leave. Not in your lifetime will the US change more than incrementally. Leave or suffer an obvious life of anguish.

While no government or nation acts perfectly, the US is, well, it's everything the President has said it is in his recent speeches--including a place like delusional people like you are free to be delusional.

But what's in it for you?
posted by ParisParamus at 12:36 PM on February 3, 2005

twiggy: watch out for the false dicotomy "either like it or leave it".
posted by elpapacito at 12:41 PM on February 3, 2005

PS: I'm not a Republican, and am unlikely to ever register as such. You don't know shit about the independence of my thought. On the other hand, your rant, which was obviously pre-drafted, and cut and pasted in, reveals you to be another pathetic Leftist asshole, programmed and brainwashed by G-d knows what or who.
posted by ParisParamus at 12:41 PM on February 3, 2005

Why do you all hate America so much?


Er... I mean Iraq?


I think.
posted by effwerd at 12:46 PM on February 3, 2005

ParisParamus: Thanks for pointing out your assholishness, but how does your suggestion even make sense? If he left, would America be less evil, in his eyes? No. So why leave?

It's perfectly possible to believe something is wrong, and, given that you can’t change it, benefit from it. It isn’t even really that hypocritical. In fact, He (or she) would be more able to change America by being here.
posted by delmoi at 12:50 PM on February 3, 2005

I thought Afghanistan was good. Seriously, if Bush just didn't invade Iraq (and all that that entailed), his first term foreign policy would have been pretty good. But Iraq overshadowed absolutely everything else, which is a shame. And I'm a rather rabid liberal who thinks Bush is the most dimwitted chucklehead to ever inhabit the office.
posted by effwerd at 12:52 PM on February 3, 2005

You guys don't know me! Even though I relentlessly shill for Bush and the GOP, I AM NOT REPUBLICAN AND YOU CAN'T PROVE OTHERWISE! Bow down to the power of my mystery, for you poor Metafilterians shall never unravel the enigma that is ParisParamus!
posted by papakwanz at 12:54 PM on February 3, 2005

So why leave? I wasn't suggesting he should. I was asking, why he would want to stay here if the place is so evil, and has nothing to offer. Because at some point, if you refuse to separate yourself from something loathsome, that is highly unlikely to change radically any time soon, you (one) have (has) an issue for a psychotherapist. I'm sure Canada would accept him, as might any number of other, less horrid nations.

Or, perhaps said poster is a foreign national taking advantage of Illinois' public university system, and will then leave? Who knows...?
posted by ParisParamus at 12:55 PM on February 3, 2005

If you don't get why Iraq was necessary, you need to do some more reading. Iraq, sooner or later, was necessary. Thankfully, President Bush has more imagination and balls than many reading this right now.
posted by ParisParamus at 12:57 PM on February 3, 2005

homodigitalis, I'm still looking at Iraq but this history of Iran seems fairly light on any mention of a democracy.

I'm not disagreeing with you but I'm not finding anything to support your statement.
posted by fenriq at 12:58 PM on February 3, 2005

"You guys don't know me! Even though I relentlessly shill for Bush and the GOP, I AM NOT REPUBLICAN AND YOU CAN'T PROVE OTHERWISE! Bow down to the power of my mystery, for you poor Metafilterians shall never unravel the enigma that is ParisParamus!"

Hey--that's exactly what my mom has said!
posted by ParisParamus at 12:59 PM on February 3, 2005

If you don't get why Iraq was necessary, you need to do some more reading.

That's for sure. You gotta keep looking for those reasons. There in there somewhere. Just keep looking. Go on.
posted by effwerd at 1:00 PM on February 3, 2005

how could an election like this not be manipulated?
posted by pwedza at 1:01 PM on February 3, 2005

So why leave? I wasn't suggesting he should.[snip]
posted by ParisParamus at 12:55 PM PST on February 3

OK Twiggy. Leave. Not in your lifetime will the US change more than incrementally. Leave or suffer an obvious life of anguish.[snip]
posted by ParisParamus at 12:36 PM PST on February 3

Can you see where you were implying he should leave?
posted by cavalier at 1:02 PM on February 3, 2005

look, ma, they're feeding trolls!
posted by hackly_fracture at 1:02 PM on February 3, 2005

Guilty.
posted by cavalier at 1:03 PM on February 3, 2005

Twiggy -
To be fair you did leave a massive chunk of US history between slavery and Vietnam. Much of it filled with extremely positive US contributions to the world. You know this.

And pollution is hardly a crime the US commits alone - nor even is the US the worst offender.

Stop wringing your hands. You said before "take it to the streets"...well ok.

You first.

And if we here in the US are REALLY that bad. Then why, oh why, stay? Why stay somewhere you truely hate? Before you accuse me of being Archie Bunker, think about it like this: It ain't "America - Love it or Leave It". It's more like "America - hate it? What's keeping you here?"

If I really thought we in the US were the next Nazi Germany or something I'd either start armed active resistance or leave for somewhere more in line with my principles.
posted by tkchrist at 1:04 PM on February 3, 2005

ParisParamus, I'm a little baffled as to how a post about election irregularities and possible fraud at home and abroad has anything to do with "hatred of everything good done by the United States." I can only assume that you think that if I post something criticizing Iraqi election procedure, I must "hate" the elections themselves. Please be assured that this is not the case.

If you would like to make an argument as to why problems with the Iraqi elections will not actually be an obstacle to Iraqi democracy, or provide evidence that they did not actually happen, or explain why they might have been necessary, or make any other substantive case as to why everything is A-OK, I'm all ears. Your strange accusations of hatred towards my own country do nothing but perplex me.
posted by kyrademon at 1:06 PM on February 3, 2005

Cavalier, the implication is that the logical, reasonable response to seeing that little right, and that much wrong with the US is to move elsewhere. He is not such a societal force that his leaving will affect my wellbeing.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:07 PM on February 3, 2005

Nothing is damning than silence.
posted by Smedleyman at 1:07 PM on February 3, 2005

Paris - I'm no leftist. It says in your profile you wanted Bush to win. That makes you by definition at least partially Republican - not only because that's his party affiliation, but because he is decidedly rightist on all issues.

I, on the other hand, did not pre write that draft. I responded right here in this little box to your silly comment. I am no leftist. I lean to the left on some issues, and I lean to the right on others. I'm a social leftist, mostly an economic rightist, but sometimes an economic moderate or leftist.

Leave because of America's past? No. America has the potential to be great - if only we'd stand up and act on all of this "American Way" overly patriotic BS that we're always spouting.

Let's start showing how great America is by getting the hell out of Iraq and letting them have their country back. Let's work towards peace in the middle east with Israel and Palastine. Let's help out the Tsunami victims. Let's use diplomacy to assure that Iran is not going to be a nuclear threat to us.

Like effwerd above - I was ok with going into Afghanistan to hunt down Al Qaeda and Osama Bin Laden. But why did we let him slip by while diverting our forces to a non-Al Qaeda, non-WMD having country?

I can see why in your profile you say you were going into lurk mode until the election was over. You should go back there.
posted by twiggy at 1:08 PM on February 3, 2005

I hate America since I hit on some american chick and she told me to get my sorry ass back to Europe.
EUROPE! FUCK YEAH!
posted by mr.marx at 1:14 PM on February 3, 2005

Or, perhaps said poster is a foreign national taking advantage of Illinois' public university system, and will then leave? Who knows...?

Wow. Talk about a tin foil hat rightist statement right there.

I'm a white male just like I'm sure you are. I took advantage of Illinois' excellent public university system (UIUC, thanks) and I stayed here - working for one of the largest worldwide financial institutions in existence. I'm a corporate suit like all the hippies despise - yet here I am spouting "leftist" "potential ferrrrigner" (apparently) "propaganda", eh?


Also: tkchrist - you're right, I've left out some good contributions. My point was to illustrate that there's plenty of harm we've done and it's ignorant to imply that America is a huge do-gooder that everyone should love unconditionally. As for "you first" -- I'm working on it. I'm giving some consideration to local politics as a stepping stone.
posted by twiggy at 1:14 PM on February 3, 2005

kyrademon, a one-sided rant about possible flaws in the election process of a proto-democracy is just plain lame. Of course there were problems. Of course there are problems with every US election. And there always will be. Shall we just have a despot take over and give up?

As for the large number of ballots, they were printed for the eventualities of loss, theft, and bombings.

I react as I do because of the one-sidedness of criticism; of piling-on; of being utterly cynical about things. Is there one, single comment above this one to the effect of

"although there were problems, the election seems to have gone surprisingly well, and we should be very proud of the Iraqi people; an perhaps the Bush administration has, all things considered, done a good job"?
posted by ParisParamus at 1:16 PM on February 3, 2005

Engaging in a conversation with ParisParamus makes about as much sense as trying rebuild the tree from the toothpicks, you're just going to get frustrated since his intent isn't debate, it is to aggravate.

And I'm in full on agreement with twiggy and effwerd, Bush should not have let Osama get away. But he probably did it as a personal favor to his business partners who happen to be bin Laden's relatives.
posted by fenriq at 1:17 PM on February 3, 2005

Trolling, trolling, trolling
Keep those insults rolling
The shill won't stop extolling
Dubya

Trolling, trolling, trolling
The wisdom he's been doling
sounds like he has been polling
Iowa

When people cast a doubt
he'll shout " you asshole" out
and snicker to himself
How great am I

Set him up
Shoot him down
call him names
like assclown
But you'll never stop the neo troll !!
posted by lobstah at 1:20 PM on February 3, 2005

Afghanistan was a no-brainer. Going into Iraq required some understanding of the cesspool, now a bit smaller, of the Mideast, which runs from the Palestinian political swamps, through Syria, Saudi Arabia, through, then Iraq; and Iran. The entire region could/can no longer be trusted because the venom and hate it incubates can no longer be contained to the region. So the Bush Administration decided it was time to start dismantling it. And Iraq was the weakest link. So we began there.

But of course, I am wasting my typing, largely on the hopeless, so I will stop.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:23 PM on February 3, 2005

call him names
like assclown

That's last line is real hard to say to the beat - but otherwise bravo!
posted by Sparx at 1:40 PM on February 3, 2005

But he probably did it as a personal favor to his business partners who happen to be bin Laden's relatives.

Yes, I'm sure the last thing Bush would have wanted for his presidential legacy would be bin Laden's capture.

And you wonder why certain folks get painted with the "dopey conspiracy theorist" tag. Those same folks shouldn't wonder why they keep losing elections (hint: it's not because they're "stolen") and hemhorraging party members and reinforcing stereotypes and never fomenting coherent alternatives to global policies they disagree with, all the while alienating the rest of us, widening the gap between Moderate and Navel-Gazing "I never met a Bush conspiracy I didn't like" Stoner Zombie, marching toward Irrelevance...
posted by dhoyt at 1:42 PM on February 3, 2005

Paris, you are a racist troll. Your every comment is one or another form of slimy debate tactic. While it seems that you are reasonably smart your arguments are totally transparent to anyone able to think critically. No one has taken a single one of your comments seriously for at least two years. Why do you even bother? What is driving you?
posted by n9 at 1:44 PM on February 3, 2005

PS: WMDs were an effect of the regime that needed to be deposed in Iraq; not the cause. The courage and wisdom of liberating Iraq was not negated by no WMDs showing up (so far).

In any case, for the foreseeable future, the US, and the world, is safe from the forces that don't like President Bush. Our republic is safe from the evils of the Left. So, I can relax.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:45 PM on February 3, 2005

PP, if Bush, et al's thinking on this was as clear as you suggest, then why didn't they follow the advice of guys like Shinseki, who as I think we can see, were right?

And, if their thinking was not so clear, why should we trust them to do anything else right?
posted by atchafalaya at 1:46 PM on February 3, 2005

Sorry Sparx...I guess I was focusing too much on words to rhyme with trolling, and got lazy at the end.
posted by lobstah at 1:46 PM on February 3, 2005

I did not once suggest "have a despot take over and give up" as a solution to fixing problems with the vote, ParisParamus, nor would I.

And while yours may be the only post on this thread so far suggesting the elections in Iraq went well (bearing in mind only about half the posts have been about Iraq, since the post covers possible election fraud in other places as well), might I suggest that, if you feel such a point should be made, you could make it more effectively by presenting some arguments as to why the vote fraud might be negligible or irrelevant, rather than beginning by accusing me of blind antipathy towards my home?
posted by kyrademon at 1:50 PM on February 3, 2005

Perhaps if you didn't post multiple paragraphs describing the US was not only worthless but affimatively evil, you would have gotten more moderate treatment?
posted by ParisParamus at 1:52 PM on February 3, 2005

What? When did I do that?
posted by kyrademon at 1:55 PM on February 3, 2005

...no WMDs showing up (so far)

Hang on to hope, tiger!
posted by chundo at 1:57 PM on February 3, 2005

Kyrademon, I was referring to Twiggy. MY comments weren't addressed to you.
posted by ParisParamus at 1:59 PM on February 3, 2005

Since your first comment was made before Twiggy said much of anything, I assumed it was about the thread in general.
posted by kyrademon at 2:03 PM on February 3, 2005

Nope. Sorry. I'm trying to be an attorney in between posts...
posted by ParisParamus at 2:05 PM on February 3, 2005

ooh , a weak double back maneuver with a professional twist... the Kung Fu is weakening !
posted by lobstah at 2:08 PM on February 3, 2005

It should be pointed out that this discussion of the failures of democracy is turning into a series of rants. My point is that democracy is only as good as the people; as this discussion demonstrates.

It's never been perfect, it'll never be perfect, but that should not be an excuse to abuse the system. For example, people who lived under the Soviet Union and who are now learning about our gov't sponsored propaganda--as in the 'news' videos produced to promote administration policies--are horrified. What scares these people is not the existence of propaganda. In the USSR, everyone knew that media was controlled by the gov't. The danger here is when people continue to believe that they have free elections, a free press, and so on, when they do not.

The Iraqi elections happened much as everyone predicted: Shiites voted, Kurds demanded independence, and the Sunnis largely withdrew.

I, for one, will be impressed if Iraq remains one country. But maybe that's the point.

Why don't many of the Iraqis feel a sense of national solidarity? Their nation was founded along boundaries established primarily by the British after the First World War to maintain the oil reserves effectively. The British experience in the 1920s was also extremely similar to the recent American experience (adjusted for technology).

Ranting pro or con is irrelevant at this point, I think. Maybe Iraq shouldn't be one country.
posted by schambers at 2:09 PM on February 3, 2005

Afghanistan was a no-brainer.

See, just as I thought. Say we don't think anything good of Bush and then we mention something we do think is good you dismiss it as a no brainer. You want to set us up for any more of your not-so-clever cowardly arguments?
posted by effwerd at 2:10 PM on February 3, 2005

Hey lobstah, you think maybe Paris Pee is this Kung Fu master?
posted by davy at 2:16 PM on February 3, 2005

Great point, schambers. I agree. I've been wondering why the insistence on one country. I like the Kurds, have since the 90s. I'd like to see them get their own state. Does anyone know why the preservation of colonial borders is so important? Is it just to keep the hype simple?
posted by effwerd at 2:18 PM on February 3, 2005

One election does not a democracy make...It is a first step, but may serve only to draw the battle lines for a bloody civil war. while the Neo Cons are patting each other on the back, the prospect of a protracted US involvement hangs in the shadows.
posted by lobstah at 2:19 PM on February 3, 2005

Schambers -

I think you have a lot of good points, but (because of where the oil is and who would end up with it) Iraq is unlikely to be able to divide itself into three countries peacefully - that would probably result in a rather bitter war.

One of the things that disturbs me most about the reports, if they are true, is that in the areas where the Sunnis and other minorities *didn't* withdraw, they appear to have been disenfranchised anyway - to the tune of, possibly, hundreds of thousands of votes, which seems a lot more than simple "first-time voting" problems, even in a war-torn country.

I can't see any peaceful internal resolution for Iraq - as one country, or as many - in which the Sunnis aren't given a place at the table when the constitution is written up and the plums are distributed. That this is happening before the new government is even formed bodes ill for any future peace.
posted by kyrademon at 2:21 PM on February 3, 2005

You know, although there were problems, the election seems to have gone surprisingly well, and we should be very proud of the Iraqi people; and perhaps the Bush administration has, all things considered, done a good job.
posted by odinsdream at 2:24 PM on February 3, 2005

effwerd, i seem to recall that the turks would get super upset if the kurds had their own state, though i'm not sure why. google fu gave me this article.

as to the question asked in the fpp: there is nothing that would restore my faith in democracy in america or anywhere else in the world. we're getting played, and we're being advised to like it. maybe it's best to just drink the kool-aid like some other people have done.
posted by lord_wolf at 2:55 PM on February 3, 2005

While I applaud the Iraqi people ( or many of them, anyway) for turning out to vote, an election held under a massive military presence is not necessarily a great victory for democracy. Time will tell whether Iraq will become a democratic state. Furthermore, I am suspect of the timing of said election. Had the event turned into chaos, the upcoming SOTU address would have focused on "the need to stay the course" Since it has been reported to be a success, the message became " Social Security will be out of funds by 2042 !!" , and all the investment bankers cheered. It was a win-win for the neocons. Yeah, I don't trust them...not one bit
posted by lobstah at 2:59 PM on February 3, 2005

GOOD WORK IRAQ. Fuck, this democracy shit is easy! Soon you will have reached "Latin American Democracy Level 7". Make sure you've got your death squads ready, as it is a required element of your at-least-it-isn't-Cuba freedom status. Your prize is a delightful economic relationship with America, which you are qualified for since you have no prior history of allowing the Manic Street Preachers to do gigs within your borders.

Please get your free boxes ready for the Glorious Tomorrow.
posted by Kleptophoria! at 3:02 PM on February 3, 2005

lord_wolf, as I understand it, the Turks are opposed to Kurdish independence because there's a huge number of Turkish Kurds living in the areas by the border. They fear an independent Kurdish state next door would lead their own Kurdish population to secede.

Never liked kool-aid. Even if things move slowly, I've got a little neice now and would like her to be able to vote in a world without minority disenfranchisement, partisan electoral commissions, and the electoral college. Maybe even with instant run-off voting, proportional - or at least correctly proportioned - representation, and verifiable paper trails. Think of the children.
posted by kyrademon at 3:02 PM on February 3, 2005

Then when the Tsunami disaster occurred, we showed our undying generosity by offering a whopping $36 million - and only after the press said "$36 million? are you kidding? the US is offering less than other countries and corporations out there!" - we finally turned around and offered more to save face.
Thought the final offering was over a $100 Million.
posted by thomcatspike at 3:07 PM on February 3, 2005

we finally turned around and offered more to save face.
Nix above comment
posted by thomcatspike at 3:09 PM on February 3, 2005

...

on preview: my post became meaningless. Thanks, lord_wolf and kyrademon.
posted by effwerd at 3:09 PM on February 3, 2005

My guess is, keeping Iraq in one piece is important to us because what we've done there is what we're offering to the rest of the Arab world. If they think our version of democracy necessarily comes with Bosnian- or Rwandan-style breakup along ethnic lines, with the accompanying turmoil, they're much less likely to go for it.
posted by atchafalaya at 3:43 PM on February 3, 2005

atchafalaya, I'd be extremely surprised if anyone ever "goes for it." What, do you call the state department and ask to be attacked?

People in Iran are already protesting an invasion that hasn't happened because they fear for their lives. Even if the U.S. were selling democracy, nobody's buying it.
posted by odinsdream at 4:10 PM on February 3, 2005

People in the Metafilter need psychotherapy to address their hatred of everything good done by the United States.

...And you know what we say whenever someone's family member gets tortured: It's good that George Bush did that!
posted by Space Coyote at 4:21 PM on February 3, 2005

The next time some Republican election official even thinks about disenfranchising anybody, people should start marching in the streets with their purple-ink-stained fingers held high. That oughta shut some people up!
posted by jonp72 at 4:30 PM on February 3, 2005

"Seymour Hersh hurried past W. and reached the front steps, mumbling. He always mumbled when he came to the White House, or passed by it, or even thought of it. Everybody did. They thought about silly things, things that didn't mean very much, like two-and-two-is-four-and-twice-is-eight and so on; they tried to jumble up their thoughts to keep them skipping back and forth, so W. couldn't read their minds. The mumbling helped. Because if W. got anything strong out of your thoughts, he might take a notion to do something about it--like getting rid of some Middle Eastern dictators, or getting the economy back on track, or fixing Social Security. And while W. mightn't actually mean any harm, he couldn't be expected to have much notion of what was the right thing to do in such cases."

It's a GOOD government.
posted by kyrademon at 4:35 PM on February 3, 2005

It ain't "America - Love it or Leave It". It's more like "America - hate it? What's keeping you here?"

money, or lack thereof. and family.

it's extremely naive to think that $10/hr John/Jane can ever earn enough to move to another country even temporarily, let alone permanently.

the only people who can afford to leave the United States are the ones who benefit most from its policies. and they do it anyway to save a little more on taxes.

on preview: nice one, kyrademon.
posted by mrgrimm at 4:41 PM on February 3, 2005

So what if the EU predicated Turkey's admission on accepting an independent Kurdistan? Would that make them more amenable to the idea?
posted by effwerd at 4:44 PM on February 3, 2005

I made it as far as the first comment:

The US can make it an imperative to fix our own voting infrastructure and to figure out how to make it perfect and perfectly transparent. Then we can demonstrate it and become an example to the rest of the world as to how it is done.

Well, I am sure that the UK, Europe, Canada, Australia, NZ etc etc etc just cannot *wait* until our inherent superiors show us how to do it properly...
posted by UbuRoivas at 5:33 PM on February 3, 2005

yaaaaaaaawwwwnnnnnnn!

/rolls over, goes back to sleep.
posted by a3matrix at 7:03 PM on February 3, 2005

Yeah, crap like that happened, even the years Clinton won.
Put away your boner.
posted by HTuttle at 12:50 AM on February 4, 2005

money, or lack thereof. and family.

Maybe family. But otherwise mrgrimm, I don't buy it. My neighborhood is filled with refugees from Indonesia, the pacific islands, Central America and East Africa. These people had NOTHING but the hope for someplace better. They came here. Gee, how did they manage it? With nothing?

I've spend good deal of my life living abroad - in Europe and in shit hole third word countries most Americans have never heard of - and I know one thing: Americans are rich. Even the "poor" ones.
posted by tkchrist at 9:41 AM on February 4, 2005