<$BlogRSDUrl$>

Wednesday, January 26, 2005

Sunnis and the election 

If white South Africans had refused to participate in that nation's first-ever free elections back in 1994, nobody on earth would have argued that their lack of participation invalidated the election results.


Indeed.

5 Comments:

By Blogger TigerHawk, at Wed Jan 26, 10:18:00 AM:

The argument that the elections are less legitimate if the Sunnis boycott has always been ridiculous. This extremely apt analogy makes that point clear. The only principled point is that a Sunni boycott may make that minority less willing to accept the elected government, and it may increase the chances for civil war. Fine. Most Western countries built their democratic institutions on the embers of a civil war. If that's what it takes for Iraq to become a real country with a real future instead of an artifact of European imperialism, so be it.  

By Blogger james82, at Wed Jan 26, 11:58:00 AM:

Well said! I don't want an Iraqi civil war, but if it occurs it would serve as payback for the Sunnis.  

By Blogger Sluggo, at Wed Jan 26, 12:32:00 PM:

There seems to be quite a number of fairly common words slipping from the grasp of comprehension of the left: 'legitimate', 'count', 'fair', and now the very concept of 'election' is getting a little slippery.

By the way, Mr. Hawk, I bow to you. Getting linked by Tim Blair, that's fancy.  

By Blogger Screwy Hoolie, at Wed Jan 26, 01:01:00 PM:

Jack,

The Sunni boycott won't invalidate the election, but the ballot will.

Voting in the New Iraq  

By Anonymous Anonymous, at Thu Jan 27, 03:37:00 AM:

And even there, voter participation was not affected by the Afrikaner terrorist groups. But then, the South African police were very, very good at dealing with threats to authority.  

Post a Comment


This page is powered by Blogger. Isn't yours?