SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the another-day-another-populist-strongman dept.
Turkish President May Receive Increased Power
The Associated Press via CBC reports on preliminary results of a referendum held in Turkey on whether the powers of the president should be increased:
With 99 per cent of the ballots counted, the "yes" vote stood at 51.37 per cent, while the "no" vote was 48.63 per cent, according to the state-run Anadolu Agency. The head of Turkey's electoral board confirmed the "yes" victory and said final results will be declared in 11-12 days.
BBC News quotes the leader of an opposing party:
The main opposition, the Republican People's Party (CHP), has called for a recount.
Deputy leader Bulent Tezcan denounced "violations" in the electoral process. "We will pursue a legal battle. If the irregularities are not fixed, there will be a serious legitimacy discussion," he said.
additional coverage:
- NPR
- BBC News
- Reuters
- CNN (editorial)
- New York Times
- Foreign Policy blog (editorial)
Turkish Electorate Appears to Choose Dictatorship; Opposition Cries Foul
Common Dreams reports Erdoğan Claims Ultimate Power in Turkey After Nearly Split Vote.
As one opponent of the referendum noted: "Threats, oppression, imprisonment, censorship, defamation--and yet half of the people of Turkey voted" against.
In a very close--and closely watched--referendum vote, Turks on [April 16] handed President Recep Tayyip Erdoğan what many say is authoritarian rule.
With more than 99 percent of ballots counted, Erdoğan claimed a win with 51.36 percent voting in favor of the referendum and 48.64 voting against.
However, the Guardian reported,
disparities persisted into Sunday evening, with the opposition saying not all ballots had been counted and they would contest a third of the votes that had been cast. [Sadi Guven, the head of Turkey's high electoral board, or YSK] said the YSK had decided to consider unstamped ballots as valid unless they were proved to be fraudulent after a high number of complaints--including one from the ruling AK Party--that its officials had failed to stamp some ballot papers.
The No campaign said the YSK's last-minute decision raised questions about the validity of the vote.
TheFederalistPapers.org reports Turkey Votes To Turn Itself Into An Islamic Dictatorship.
Turkey's new dictator, President Recip Tayyip Erdoğan claimed victory in Sunday's vote on whether he should essentially take almost complete control over the country.
The opposition has said they would contest the election, citing rampant voter fraud, but the election is no less stunning.
Turkey is a member of NATO and a crucial ally (sometimes) in the fight against terrorism.
[...] If the results are upheld, it gives Turkey's government--with Erdoğan at the helm--widespread authority to scrap the centuries-old parliamentary system, replacing it with a presidential model. It would concentrate massive power in the hands of the president who has recently jailed opponents and cracked down on dissent.
Erdoğan will be able to appoint senior judges, declare a state of emergency, dissolve parliament, and in some cases issue new laws be [decreed].
It will also theoretically allow Erdoğan, who has dominated Turkish politics as president and prime minister since 2003, to stay in office until 2029.
(Score: 3, Informative) by AthanasiusKircher on Wednesday April 19 2017, @06:03PM (1 child)
Do I believe there was some kind of election fraud? Highly probable.
Yes, but regardless of the extent of possible fraud in this case, I think we're beginning to see the end of democracy worldwide, or at least widespread recognition of its failure. For every dictator who is fraudulently elected, there is another example of a tyrant who is voted in voluntarily by the public.
Of course Plato recognized this back in the days when democracy was a new idea. If people don't know this already, they really should acquaint themselves with Plato's five political systems [wikipedia.org]. You may not agree with his outlook or preference for "philosopher kings," but history has clearly proven him right again and again as democracy turns into "mob rule" and that mob eventually votes in favor of tyranny.
This has happened again and again throughout history, which is why the Founders of the U.S. took such great pains to take power away from the people and direct democracy. But in the past century or so, populism has led to the rallying cry of "democracy" as a force for good in the world, which means more "power to the people."
Ironically, though, history has shown us that "the people," having been granted power, frequently vote it away to a dictator who promises them stuff they want (food, safety, homes, land, jobs, etc.). The educated people of the 18th century had read their history and understood this. Of course, there's no perfect system -- putting power out of the hands of the people risks corruption at other levels of government.
In recent years, it has been common to slam other "bad" countries for having "bad democracies," i.e., even if they are nominally democratic, their system isn't functional. But given recent events in many countries, I think it's worthwhile considering whether that strict distinction between "good" and "bad" democracies is really sustainable. Plato warned us that democracies can easily degrade into tyranny. At some point we seem to have forgotten that lesson -- or perhaps thought, "Oh, no -- that couldn't happen in a modern democracy! We have the RIGHT kind of government! It can't happen here!"
Folks, it's happening. Around the world. Even classic "good" western democracies are increasingly voting in favor of people who promise them totalitarian regimes. France could be the next to take a big step away from freedom in favor of vacuous populist rhetoric. The dominos may be starting to tumble, and most people don't even notice. All we worry about are rare "terrorist" events (most of them committed by mentally ill people with no strong ties to actual organizations) and people who don't look like us. We chase people who promise us jobs and houses and good lives, but who really have their own agendas that ultimately work against the people in the long run.
Maybe it was always thus. But I have to admit that for the first time in my life, I'm getting worried about the very future of democracy.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday April 20 2017, @01:04AM
A lot of democracies are already corrupted such that they proceed with actions that are not in the interest of the people. The reaction is of course to vote into the far end of the political spectrum in order to make sure there's a course change even if it has bad side effects.
There seems to be a lot of mentally ill people with good coordination skills. What is more interesting is the lack of action of the government both in removing these people from the society and from letting more in.
When the people vote power goes wrong another vote btw is the one of using ones feet.