[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

#4164: On the failure of a democratic success (fwd)

From: Jean Poincy <caineve@idt.net>

The result of the recent elections in favor of one party is not
something to cheer for. It leaves no room for plurality and tolerance,
two essential elements in a representative democracy. At this juncture,
the masses' judgment keeps failing. It is a replica of 1991 that lead to
political back stabbing victimizing Aristide and to the coup d'Etat. 

The masses got it all wrong by thinking (?) that an overwhelming
majority will bring relief to their plight. It would be so only if all
party members (members of the party) embraced the same philosophy,
showed willingness to iron out their differences and cooperated to
attain one collective goal, the well-being of Ayiti and that of its

However, this is not the case. Everyone see Ayiti's problem through
individual lenses. Over their individual agenda, they will bicker at
each other at the detriment of the whole and subsequently at theirs.
That's quite irrational from their part, not to be able to strategically
shape their positions to avoid unwanted consequences. Pointing out these
political deficiencies does not say that having plurality would make
matters different. 

That's the democratic catch 22 that Ayiti falls into by embracing
"democracy as is". There is a paradox on the Ayitian political mat:
plurality is not an automatic assurance that things will run smoothly is
tolerance is absent. Such a state is the malignant tumor eroding Ayiti.
Today, Ayitians are quite incapable to nurture tolerance both in public
and private affaires. They have no sense of cooperation, the alloy of
plurality and tolerance.

Until such is learned, Ayiti's future will remain gleam and the
defenders of "democracy as is" will be disappointed over and over again.
I would hate to see Aristide unable to overcome this dilemma and to end
up as one of the most hated leaders by the masses.

We can't look at the fact that people flooded the voting booths and say
that democracy is in progress. The voting act is a non-essential process
in making democracy effective. To really say that democracy is in
progress, we must look at the end of the spectrum and evaluate the
result. If what is expected is achieved, democracy is working. If the
expected does not see light, the process falls short.

We can't be happy because people voted in great numbers. We can't start
accusing the leaders of disrupting the process. The leaders' behaviors
are the symptom of an ill process that bounds to constantly produce
imbalances in the result. That's a direct consequence of the masses'
immature judgment.

Ayiti has lived, lives and will live