Recall rulings in California and Venezuela: Very similar yet so different.
I am sure that some people will try to draw parallels between the three judge panel canceling the California recall and the decisions taken in
-If the voting machines are not good enough for the vote on the recall, they should not be good enough to vote on anything, whether candidates or issues until the problems are solved. Thus no election should take place until it is fixed. But this does not make sense either.
-Should Democracy be in suspended animation until the problems are solved? For how long? When is form more important than substance? When should the will of the people be more important?
-The three Judge panel is composed of three Democrats and is supposed to be the most liberal (read pro-Democratic party) in the
-I would like to ask: Are these the same voting machines with which Davies was chosen as a candidate for the Democrats and was later elected as Governor? Did anybody complain then? Should his elections be erased too in the interest of Justice or Democracy?
-I hate to be innovative or futuristic, but couldn’t they use something like pencil and paper to vote with? Too complicated? People don’t know how to write anymore? People can cheat with paper ballots?
I think in the end the difference is very clear, in every country there are biased, politically corrupt people or individuals with a limited understanding of what democracy truly is. Form can never replace substance and the people’s participation is indeed at the conceptual foundation of Democracy. The difference is that while Democracy has been suspended in
I’m not so optimistic about a quick solution being found in California, but he does have a point–it’s not as bad when it’s only a Governor, and not the President.
Leave a Reply