I'm not sure how many people have been following the situation in Iran but they have recently held elections and Amedenijad (probably spelled wrong) was declared the initial winner.

This announcement has sparked quite a bit of rioting and protest from the Iranian people. Many of them feel that the election was rigged and that the person they voted for should have won.

Well the election itself wasn't really democratic since the candidate were pre-selected and not picked in any deomcratic fashion. But regardless of that it seems that many Iranians feel that the vote itself was rigged and that their chose has not been recognized. Oh, Amedenijad won by a 2 to 1 margin over the next closest person (not sure where I heard that).... I think that is a big reason why people don't believe the results.


And what has the rest of the world done? Basically nothing. "Oh, we think there should be a review of the election results"... "I don't really want to meddle"... give me a break. This country is screaming out for a chance to have a fair election and to exercise a little freedom and the West is basically saying sucks to be you.

What are everyone else's thoughts on the situation? Do you think the election was fair and/or democratic.... do you think the rest of the world should try and exercise more incluence in the area at this time?

I really don't like elections in the first place. I think we should trash the idea of elections and allow everyone to be apart of the countries direction instead of just having a useless option to vote sounds better to me. Maybe countries would be better off if the PEOPLE were able to do a thing about it's direction, instead you got wackos puppets in business suits making laws and doing stuff that is really unethical.

I really hate looking up to "the one, mr. president". Seems like every idea they propose is done behind our backs and they just forget about the people and pursue their own personal interests.

Basically what I'm trying to say is, people need to have more saying in a countries direction, why let our fate balance in the hands of a single celebrity figure? If people want change, just don't vote and give in to their system. Start a new system and go from there, although this would probably not happen without a massive revolution involving lots of bloodshed. That's the only way to make a fair system, just remake the whole dam thing lol.

I completely agree with you.... the current system is touted as being democratic and "for the people" except that the majority of what politicians do is actually for their own personaly gain...

however, I think the freedom allowed under that system is better than what other countries endure. I would rather live under a flawed "democracy" than under a totalitarian regime that controls my every action.

There is a system I remember hearing about that allows the people to organize government in a more simple way.

Every 10 families in a community would get to elect a local leader that would oversee those 10 families and would be accountable to them. That 1 leader would be 1 of many (MANY) local leaders. Now, these 10 families would get together with 90 other families (each with a local leader) and would elect out of the 100 families someone to represent that entire group and they would be accouantable to them. So, there are now 11 leaders out of 100 families....

you move up by 10's as the population requires and by geography. While this system might be somewhat tough to keep organized at times it would remove the "politician" from the system and force real people to govern themselves more. I'm sure there is more to the system than what I've presented but I think there is some value here. The system we currently have rewards politicians too much.

Civic duty should not be the position of power and influence it is now. People should get into politics to improve the country, state, city etc. for the sake of helping the people in their communities. And I think the people that represent us should actually have a stake in the area they represent. I'm tired of seeing these people in the capital of the country grandstanding about how important all these things that they are doing yet when it comes to actually knowing what is going on they are clueless....

wow, this thread is off topic now and it only took 2 posts to get there.

Easy. Make it illegal for politicians to get a paycheck or job perks.
Then they would have to get an actual job and the only ones that would be politicians would be people that wanted to help. And meglomanics

As far as the topic, I don't know anything on the matter but it's probally just the usual complaining.
No matter who wins an election someone complains, its just more noticable because of where it is.
If the people think its wrong then they should do something about it instead of crying to the world.
We would soon find out if it is just a few malcontents or everyone...

Nice system geo never heard of it but sounds good

DH I agree, elections split population down the middle then you got half a country who disagrees, why not just fuse it all in one would make a better place

DH has got a point though... make it all nonprofit and we will find out who REALLY wants to help!

DH: I agree. Politicians early on in the US, Canada and other democratic countries did not get a paycheck. They worked their normal jobs and did their other political duties as they had time. And if you consider how much time the politicians actually spend working I don't see why this can't still be the case. It's absolutely ridiculous how set a politician is. They get paid 3 times the national average (ish) and they also have retirement packages that are way better than the national average. And yet if these people worked for a large corporation they would have been fired a long time ago.

oh, and if you look at the people getting into politics now... they are mostly rich kids that haven't actually had a real struggle in their lives yet they talk like they know what it is like to be the rest of us.

JigSaw: it's actually the Jewish model of government during Moses's time. Each representative was the judge of the people he ruled over. If he couldn't make a decision on an issue then it went to the next higher person and so on.

The simplistic democracy is best described in the book "Common Sense" by Thomas Paine. This book was mainly directed toward settlers of the "New World" and opposed British Monarchy. As a result of releasing this book, Paine was exiled from England.

The US government system is now a game of stacking cards. We need to refine the system to it's simple roots. "Knock the cards over" and start anew.

Geeogree explains this best-
"Every 10 families in a community would get to elect a local leader that would oversee those 10 families and would be accountable to them."

This was Thomas Paine's idea of democracy. The leaders would have a certain term, then they would be recycled back through the system. Leaders would never make bad choices for their people because they ARE the people.

Nowadays, leaders (like presidents) never really go back to a civilian life. They pretty much stay above their "peers" until they die. They never have to bear the consequences of their decisions.

Originally posted by Aethelwulf

---

Nowadays, leaders (like presidents) never really go back to a civilian life. They pretty much stay above their "peers" until they die. They never have to bear the consequences of their decisions.

---

And thats one of the main problems isnt it.
They are not accountable realistically and therefore can not be counted on to make decisions that are in the best interests of anyone other then themselves in the long run.

Now as far as the Iranians, am I right in assuming that they havnt had a system like this in place before?
So therefore they are unused to things like this and assume that the person they voted for should be in and when that person doesnt get in they cry wolf.
It doesnt mean anything fishy happened, just that they are not used to a system like that.

@Aethelwulf: They don't get back down to earth because they already were that way. The problem is, you need a lot of money to run a presidential campaign and so average people lack the funding to compete

Anyway, back on topic...
Someone needs to step in before Iran really starts to mass murder civilians. The people obviously won't give up and the government will continue to use force.