Welcome Guest [Log In] [Register]
We hope you enjoy your visit.


You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free.


Join our community!


If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features:

Username:   Password:
Add Reply
Secular Iraq and Rummies' Time line
Topic Started: May 10 2004, 07:05 PM (288 Views)
doctortobe
Speak softly, and carry a 57 megaton stick!
Also, I would like to add that the formation of Iran's government did not have HALF the control that the formation of Germany's and Japan's. Do you realize how difficult it is to form a new democracy? How many republics have failed and turned into despotism soon after? If anything, America was a fluke. We are one of the few countries that was able to embrace democracy and actually stick to our guns on the matter.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
This might be off topic, but it is pretty amazing that America maintained it's original democratic charter. I think it had a lot to do with the fact that originally, we were more of a confederacy (states printed their own currency) and eventually set up the federalist system where states still retained a measure of autonomy, but had to conform to some federal rules.

The biggest problem with setting up a new democracy is setting up political parties. Usually in third world nations they're formed out of either religious or ethnic lines, thus perpetuating the same age old conflicts. It's pretty hard to start out fresh, but the UN has been overseeing fair elections for decades. I know I'm pretty much alone in my perception of UN legitimacy, but since it's their specialty, I think we ought to let them have a more direct hand in setting up democracy in Iraq.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Adrian
Lieutenant Commander
Actually, it's not that remarkable. The Americans came from the British political tradition and it would've been pretty unpopular to go to a form of governmet totally alien to what the people were used to. Our own government turned out to be a slight evolution of the British system (after the original Confederacy idea died).
Gearge Washington could've made a dictatorship right after the Revolution, but it would've been short lived. One of the reasons he only stayed for two terms was that even he was starting to feel some real heat from the press and wanted to get out while the people still loved him.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Wasn't there a faction who wanted to make Washington king?
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Adrian
Lieutenant Commander
Yeah, mostly Continetal Army officers. But I think they were a tiny minority. It makes a greet story.
All of the officers gather together to form their coup. Washington gets wind of this and rides into the meeting. Before the officers can tell Washington of their plans, he pulls out a speech he's prepared. Washington, known for being fairly vain, shocks everyone by pulling out his reading spectecles (something he rarely did in the presence of others, not to mention inferior officers). Noticing the officers' shock, he replies "You'll have to excuse me gentlemen, but I have gone nearly blind in the service of my country," shameing all of the officers assembled. He reads his small speech and promptly leaves. The messae was clear: no man that truly serves America wants to be king and you should be ashamed for planing it.
John Adams would later propse that the preident be referred to as "His Majesty" and Congeress nearly went into rebellion! The more modest "Mr. President" was adpoted.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Adrian
Lieutenant Commander
Sorry, that was totally off topic.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Dr. Noah
Sistertrek's Asian Correspondant
Hey I asked! If anyone should apologize it's me.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ds9074
Member Avatar
Admiral
His Majesty George W Bush. LOL
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
The big problem with Iran is its "Guardian Council", the clerics and other fundamentalist conservative voices that get to veto anything the like. If they ever find a way to install moderates on that Council, and couple that with their citizens propensity to vote westward leaning moderates into Parliament, you might actually begin to see real development in their socio-political culture there. If moderates are continually repressed in Iran, I won't be surprised to see a new revolution come along...

from the Iranian Constitution
 
Article 13
Zoroastrian, Jewish, and Christian Iranians are the only recognized religious minorities, who, within the limits of the law, are free to perform their religious rites and ceremonies, and to act according to their own canon in matters of personal affairs and religious education.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
ANOVA
Vice Admiral
What are the "limits of the law"?

Are they allowed to build new houses of worship?
Marry Muslim Women?
Testify against a Mulsim in a court of law?

I have a feeling the answer is no. Only becuase it is no in Nigeria, Pakistan, Egypt and Suadi Arabia. I'm just guessing though.

Evangalical Missionaries have a habit of turning up dead (when they turn up at all) while visiting Iran.

ANOVA
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
Swidden
Member Avatar
Adm. Gadfly-at-large; Provisional wRench-fly at large
From what I understand, they are not to be discriminated against. They are supposed to be able to testify in court. I suspect that they would be expected to convert if they were inclined to marry a muslim.

Iran remains something of an oddity in many respects. The majority of the population is under 25 and looks westward in many respects and votes very moderate. Yet, the very conservative Guardian Council interferes with the constitution time and again (including the recent uproar over disallowing moderate candidates from running for office, including incumbents). I personally believe if the moderates in Iran ever gained control of the Guardian Council we might see a truly functional Islamic republic eventually develop.
Offline | Profile | Quote | ^
 
« Previous Topic · Politics and World Events Forum · Next Topic »
Add Reply

Tweet
comments powered by Disqus