My RSS Feeds
Voting = Freedom?
An archived story from the New York Times in 1967 may still have meaning today:
U.S. Encouraged by Vietnam Vote:
Officials Cite 83% Turnout Despite Vietcong Terrorby Peter Grose, Special to the New York Times (9/4/1967)
WASHINGTON, Sept. 3-- United States officials were surprised and heartened today at the size of turnout in South Vietnam's presidential election despite a Vietcong terrorist campaign to disrupt the voting.
According to reports from Saigon, 83 per cent of the 5.85 million registered voters cast their ballots yesterday. Many of them risked reprisals threatened by the Vietcong.
The size of the popular vote and the inability of the Vietcong to destroy the election machinery were the two salient facts in a preliminary assessment of the nation election based on the incomplete returns reaching here.
Pending more detailed reports, neither the State Department nor the White House would comment on the balloting or the victory of the military candidates, Lieut. Gen. Nguyen Van Thieu, who was running for president, and Premier Nguyen Cao Ky, the candidate for vice president.
A successful election has long been seen as the keystone in President Johnson's policy of encouraging the growth of constitutional processes in South Vietnam. The election was the culmination of a constitutional development that began in January, 1966, to which President Johnson gave his personal commitment when he met Premier Ky and General Thieu, the chief of state, in Honolulu in February. [continue reading]
Just having an election does little to bring freedom to an area. The Soviets had "elections" all the time. The trappings of "democracy" are easy to put on display. But where's the beef? (A hat tip to TheNewAmerican.com for the link to the above story.)
On a related topic, for an eye-opening perspective on Vietnam, read Seven Myths of the Vietnamese War.
Certainly elections are not all that is needed a respect for rights of
others is important as well.
However, on the whole the election in Iraq and what is going over there is VERY promising!
Marcus Aurelius [framness@athenet.net]
Yes, but promising for whom? The Shiite group that dominated the election
is a radical revolutionary group in league with Irania fundamentalists.
Democracy, which is simply mob rule in the absence of the principles that
make a true constitutional Republic, gives radical Shiites the power they
want. This election is actually very promising for Iran,
part of the "axis of evil."
Visit me @ http://www.jefflindsay.com/