- Joined
- Oct 11, 2004
- Messages
- 216
- Reaction score
- 2
Shobra said:I have no problem with what you said (except maybe the origin of the word "masary," I'm not sure about that. I believe it's short for "masareef").
Anyways, I don't care for Mubarak, and I don't think any of the above posts do. It's easy to assume that most of those who would vote for Mubarak are brainwashed. However, as we mentioned, this is not the case. The problem is that, as we also mentioned above, there is no one else. He is the "least worst." You are talking about an Islamic state. Fine. Could you tell us then who we should vote for?! What's his name?
Perhaps you arent brainwashed. (In all honesty, I hate when people throw that term around.) But you are certainly in denial or you are grossly misinformed. How can you say that he is the least worst? You have not tried to defend this statement or offer evidence that would establish its validity. Rather you resort to repeating it. Show me the evidence and then well talk.
Shobra said:I believe that the word "brainwashed" is easy to use for labelling anyone who just would vote for Mubarak for apparent reasons. Don't make the big mistake of thinking that others "just don't get it". I believe there's much more to it.
What apparent reasons? That he is the least worst?
What's that I hear? A broken record?
Shobra said:I don't like Mubarak, and I don't like that he's been running the country for almost my age. I am willing to vote for someone who can make things better, if such a person existed...
Peace!!!
You dont like him, do not re-elect him. That would seem like the most logical series of events to a sensible person, wouldnt you agree? (It seems simple enough to me.) For arguments sake, I am going to pretend that you have convincing evidence to lead you to unflinchingly believe that the other two candidates will cause much greater harm to the country in a month than Mubarak has over his 24-year reign. Given such an (outrageous) assumption, I still stand by what I said, namely that you should STILL kick Mubarak to the curb. Hes had his chanceS -as there were SEVERAL- and he didnt capitalize. It isnt your duty to give him the benefit of the doubt. In fact, it is every citizens duty to do just the opposite. That is, you (as a citizen) are inherently obligated to scrutinize every action he takes and to evaluate/criticize every decision he makes. This is how you maintain a successful democracy- by keeping the boss in check and making sure he is held accountable for his actions. When the people feel that he has failed them/their country, you say ok, youve had your chance, and you blew it time for someone else.
Which begs (and brings back) the question: ANYONE else? That is a resounding yes you hear via cyber space. Why? Well because you want to set a good precedent for future leaders. The precedent being that once you are in power, it is not game over, but rather game on that is to say that when you have assumed power, your job isnt finished but rather has only just begun! And if you do not do that job to the satisfaction of the people who elected you to accomplish it, then you are NOT going to get re-elected. Period. End of discussion. Therefore, if you do not like the way Mubarak has handled things, you do NOT re-elect him. Because otherwise, the message you are sending is we are ok with what you have been doing (even though this is clearly not the case). And believe me he got the message, loud and clear. As did any other potential future leaders.
So you see, the abuse of power paramount among todays leaders is due to the fact that when they reach the coveted leadership position (korsy) they do not assume the responsibilities that come with said position (although they certainly reap the benefits associated with it). Secondly and more importantly, they are NOT being held responsible for their reckless actions by the people. Instead, they are being rewarded for said actions by being kept in power. This in turn leads to them abusing their power even more than was previously done since they found such a course of action to be rather rewarding the first time around. This also brings us back full circle because once again, the same precedent is being set for future leaders (and so the vicious cycle continues )
So Unfortunately the precedent that has been set as a result of these elections is diametrically opposed to what I have been harping on (at length!). I am a firm believer that past behaviour is the best predictor of future behaviour (stranglely enough, this is what precedent connotes in a vague/loose sense). This leads me to two conclusions: namely that Mubarak will continue to lead his country as he has in the past; and that the next leader who is likely to be his son will learn from him (and from the precedent that has been set) a valuable lesson that once in power, you will not be held accountable for your actions by the people who presumably put you there. This lesson is so valuable that we all pay the price.
Cheers,
Monette