Symbolic International Elections

Dear Humanity,

I have a dream that someday there will be a world without nations, etc. etc.

But as a first step I think we should have international democratic
elections.

I think they should be almost entirely symbolic. The important thing is to
have elections that cross all borders.

They could be elections about a million different things:
– what is the greatest problem in the world?
– should “insert name of country/countries” invade “insert name of country”?
– What is the most peace promoting country?
– What is the most war promoting country?

And a million other things.

Basically all that is required is a webpage, and the patience to wait a
couple of years until everyone has access to the internet. Of course it
would help if the UN or some other international organization recognized
this, but I think it’s worth a shot.

Somewhat related in Germany:
http://www.dw.de/dw/article/0,,15364738,00.html

“Symbolic election gives Berlin’s foreigners a voice
[…]
The symbolic election didn’t count for anything of course, but that was
the point. It was meant to draw attention to the German capital’s 460,000
residents – 13 percent of the population – who don’t have a vote because
they don’t have a German passport.

Maybe most people don’t care about what goes on in a lot of other countries. But the point is to spread the information, not to determine policy, which is pretty much determined by power relations. My goal is to foster honesty and dialogue.

To me there is a difference between caring about what the French want in
the sense of caring about whether they get what they want or not, and
caring about what the French want, as in wanting to know what the bastards
are up to, and then calling them racist fascist hypocrites (the French
government supported the genocidal side of the Rwandan massacre).

Now you could say that the “insert name of country” citizens could support
a government that does terrible things like that, and then go ahead and
lie in these elections and claim they want the opposite, but I think it’s
good that they should be forced to lie, and look like double assholes.
Then they are either hypocrites or they lack democracy (and maybe the UN
should bomb their capital and carry out operation “insert name of country”
freedom).

Finally my goal is not hippy touchy feely stuff. I would be very happy for
it to polarize things (“F$CK you (racist,sexist,nazi, other category) X”),
and expose the real reality of conflict.

It is to expose the sort of lie, where we claim that we are waging war to
give the gift of democracy. Ok democracy, then do we want them to vote in
our elections? Well no, obviously not, they’re on the other side of the
world, that doesn’t make sense! Ok so wait, we’re not giving them our
democracy, what democracy are we sharing with them? Do we have a Middle
Eastern democracy that we want them to be a part of? No… Ok then some
international democracy? Well no, we don’t give a F$ck what those guys
want…

It’s really a response to the South Park episode where the kids go to
Afghanistan. Where the Afghan kid tells Stan and Kyle, that the whole
world hates Americans, because Americans don’t know that the whole word
hates them :)
I need to work on clearing up my thoughts, but what I’m thinking is
related to the conflict between the following two biblical messages:
Matthew 22:
[…]
35 Then one of them, which was a lawyer, asked him a question, tempting
him,
and saying,
36 Master, which is the great commandment in the law?
37 Jesus said unto him, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy
heart,
and with all thy soul, and with all thy mind.
38 This is the first and great commandment.
39 And the second is like unto it, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as
thyself.
40 On these two commandments hang all the law and the prophets.
[…]

and:
Matthew 10:
[…]
34 Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send
peace,
but a sword.
35 For I am come to set a man at variance against his father, and the
daughter against her mother, and the daughter in law against her mother in
law.
36 And a man’s foes shall be they of his own household.
37 He that loveth father or mother more than me is not worthy of me: and he
that loveth son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me.
38 And he that taketh not his cross, and followeth after me, is not
worthy of
me.
39 He that findeth his life shall lose it: and he that loseth his life
for my
sake shall find it.
40 He that receiveth you receiveth me, and he that receiveth me
receiveth him
that sent me.
41 He that receiveth a prophet in the name of a prophet shall receive a
prophet’s reward; and he that receiveth a righteous man in the name of a
righteous man shall receive a righteous man’s reward.
42 And whosoever shall give to drink unto one of these little ones a cup of
cold water only in the name of a disciple, verily I say unto you, he shall in
no wise lose his reward.

Basically I believe that the problems of the world are not the result of a
conflict between workers and capitalists. Workers and capitalists are not
in class conflict today, they are in class collusion. There is no major
propaganda necessary to make us not give a F$ck about poverty in Africa,
and it is obvious when people are worried about immigrants taking jobs
away from “real Canadians”, or the Chinese taking jobs away, and all other
kinds of loser and parasitical ideas.

So I think we need to love our symbolic neighbours who more and more may
live on the other side of the world (Chinese democracy activists), and
take up a sword against our symbolic family (assholes we are supposed to
love because they are citizens of our country even though they pretty much
hate Quebec (not real Canadians) and foreigners (not real Quebecois), or
because like France, they are part of the free world or the West or
something like that).

0saves
If you enjoyed this post, please consider leaving a comment or subscribing to the RSS feed to have future articles delivered to your feed reader.

Leave a Reply