Paving the way for outside actors to mess with those elections. Look at how much democracy Lebanon has with all its parties and yet it’s a giant mess. Americans complain about Russian interference in US elections but somehow don’t understand how that problem is far worse in a country with a tiny fraction of the resources that the US has. In fact, the US would be one of those outside actors trying to influence the elections, which they’ve done for many decades now in many different countries.
The future is uncertain: this is what freedom looks like. My entire heart goes out to the Syrian people. Hopefully the maniacs leading the HTS and the SNA will not manage to smother them.
This is what freedom for the most brutal looks like. The most brutal tend to be religious fanatics because they think they have God on their side and they’re willing to die for their cause. You can guarantee that whoever comes out on top will be establishing an ultraconservative theocracy and things will be worse for the Syrian people (except for those who are into that shit, maybe).
Paving the way for outside actors to mess with those elections.
So? If potential future foreign interference is a legitimate reason to NOT have democracy at all, then ALL democracy becomes impossible. You’re basically making the argument that democracy is impossible so Syrians should never ask for democratic reforms because …if they do sometime in the future some external actor might try to influence their election?
And it’s actually worse than that. They asked for democracy and they got bullets, chemical warfare and over a decade of destruction and dispossession. Was the threat of some potential election meddling that horrible that all of that is preferable? Ask any Syrian refugee in Lebanon if they wouldn’t trade the destruction of their country with Lebanon’s broken sectarian system.
Ultimately you’re making an argument that either they should have 100% of a good thing or 0% of the thing AND brutality for asking for the thing in the first place. And that’s utterly nonsensical.
You can guarantee that whoever comes out on top will be establishing an ultraconservative theocracy and things will be worse for the Syrian people
You actually cannot “guarantee” it. It is a possibility, but there are no guarantees. You can be pessimistic of course. But history never guarantees anything. I mentioned elsewhere in the thread that by “freedom”, I was referring to this particular moment right here, where nothing is for sure and things could go to the better or the worse. RIGHT NOW, there is uncertainty. Even if tomorrow HTS tries to enforce a khalifate or whatever shit, right now, this is a moment of freedom for Syrians. Just look at what they are saying. You can’t deny what you see. They are saying that after decades they are able to finally breathe. The future IS open, but not guaranteed.
Paving the way for outside actors to mess with those elections. Look at how much democracy Lebanon has with all its parties and yet it’s a giant mess. Americans complain about Russian interference in US elections but somehow don’t understand how that problem is far worse in a country with a tiny fraction of the resources that the US has. In fact, the US would be one of those outside actors trying to influence the elections, which they’ve done for many decades now in many different countries.
This is what freedom for the most brutal looks like. The most brutal tend to be religious fanatics because they think they have God on their side and they’re willing to die for their cause. You can guarantee that whoever comes out on top will be establishing an ultraconservative theocracy and things will be worse for the Syrian people (except for those who are into that shit, maybe).
Respectfully, that’s a load of nonsense:
So? If potential future foreign interference is a legitimate reason to NOT have democracy at all, then ALL democracy becomes impossible. You’re basically making the argument that democracy is impossible so Syrians should never ask for democratic reforms because …if they do sometime in the future some external actor might try to influence their election?
And it’s actually worse than that. They asked for democracy and they got bullets, chemical warfare and over a decade of destruction and dispossession. Was the threat of some potential election meddling that horrible that all of that is preferable? Ask any Syrian refugee in Lebanon if they wouldn’t trade the destruction of their country with Lebanon’s broken sectarian system.
Ultimately you’re making an argument that either they should have 100% of a good thing or 0% of the thing AND brutality for asking for the thing in the first place. And that’s utterly nonsensical.
You actually cannot “guarantee” it. It is a possibility, but there are no guarantees. You can be pessimistic of course. But history never guarantees anything. I mentioned elsewhere in the thread that by “freedom”, I was referring to this particular moment right here, where nothing is for sure and things could go to the better or the worse. RIGHT NOW, there is uncertainty. Even if tomorrow HTS tries to enforce a khalifate or whatever shit, right now, this is a moment of freedom for Syrians. Just look at what they are saying. You can’t deny what you see. They are saying that after decades they are able to finally breathe. The future IS open, but not guaranteed.