Iran’s next presidential election, scheduled for June 18, is approaching. Once again, Iranians inside and outside the country are busy discussing whether to vote – whether voting would make any difference.
In the Islamic Republic, where there is no democracy in its founding, there is a clear disagreement and a lack of confidence in the whole idea of voting.
Why you should go: Go to the polls and legitimately form a democratic government or sit at home and demonstrate its opposition? That is the question.
Most Iranians are not satisfied with their choice – and most importantly, they will not stop their advertising.
On the one hand, there are the ruling elites, who falsely claim to respect the right of the Iranian people to elect their own leaders and urge them to vote in its elections. But it also illuminates all candidates carefully and allows only those who are loyal to the government to run.
Opposition groups called for the release of all “opposition” activists outside the region who are urging Iranian people to hold fraudulent elections with the words “No in the Islamic Republic” – as if they were planning to vote “Yes in the Islamic Republic”.
These two opposing groups have their own weapons and territories.
The ruling party will use its machinery and media tools to make it look like everything is fun in La La Land of the Islamic Republic and people are rushing to reaffirm their trust in the dictatorship.
The opposition, however, is trying to sell the idea that all people under Islamic rule are ready to rebel and bring in Reza Pahlavi (monarchist) or Maryam Rajavi (magician). They have Saudi, Israeli, and American politicians, such as Rudy Giuliani, on their side.
‘A plague is in all your houses!’
Between these two fables is what will happen to 80 million people who can’t stand one of these evil camps and wish them a “plague in both your homes!”
So, come June, a happy month, what would it mean if the majority of people voted, or did not vote?
Maybe it doesn’t matter. Alternatively, not only the fraudulent government elections, and the consequences, but something very different is to improve the political system in Iran.
Indeed, if we look back on the 2009 Green Movement, the student-led uprising of 1999, the 1997 Reform movement, despite the turmoil that followed the Iran-Iraq war of 1980-1988, we can see that the Iranian people were trying to achieve independence. his is not based on the ballot box.
Since the rise of the Islamic Republic, a number of Iranian ethnic groups have been at odds with his ideology. This does not mean that those who oppose the government are all mentally ill or moral people in their politics, or that they are waiting for the US military to come and liberate them as they “liberated” Iraq or Afghanistan. It simply means that they do not support the ruling class. They think that they must be better. They do.
Some of these people vote in elections, while others do not. But the temporary voting majority in Iran does not mean guaranteeing sovereignty and legitimacy for the rulers. And the decline in voter turnout – as expected in the June election – does not mean the desire to intervene.
All forms of democracy in countries like Iran show that countries should rule and not the legitimacy of the countries that accuse them. The ruling states that Iran, Egypt, Syria, and other surrounding countries have long been not mentioned as representing the countries that are systematically persecuting them – whether they continue to hold fraudulent elections or not.
Approval of government against national authority
To rule at this time is the immutable power of the nations of their home. Here, authority was not handed over to government agencies who claim to be the superiors. In this case, autonomy represents the sovereignty of the state itself, self-determination. The Islamic Republic says that Shia authorities have ruled that they will be prosecuted.
But while all Shia lawmakers around the world can come together and sign a non-democratic doctrine of “velayat-e faqih” (supreme lawmaker), to say that the jurisdiction of the jure does not mean it is correct when the same nation can deny that rule. Predicting the velayat-e faqih’s non-democratic doctrine, the Islamic Republic is baseless.
All of the Islamic Republic’s weapons are connected by a number of security forces, intelligence, and weapons. Well-meaning thinkers inside Iran call it the “dolat-e padegani” (military government). The ordinary and peaceful citizens of this false “Republic” cannot say that this government is unjust. That is why every election the government starts publishing as a legitimate token, the nation uses another function. Whether they vote or not, they turn out to be a difficult opportunity to dictate why the government is in power.
You can ask how we know and where the barometer is on the world map. The answer is simple. The country itself gives it, because it knows and fears its own crime so it sees any legal or presidential election as a legitimate symbol.
Have you ever seen elections anywhere in the world with democracy where elections seem to be nothing more than rivalry between rival parties – say between Democrats and Republicans in the US, Labor and Conservatives in the UK or BJP and Congress in India?
This is not the case in the Islamic Republic. The success of the election and the failure of the reformers, officials and leaders in Iran are in stark contrast to the deep concerns of the Prime Minister and his allied party that is targeting the government before or after any elections. It does not matter which party will win until the government initiates a protest demonstration.
National elections are not between rival parties vying for citizens’ trust. He is in the midst of a country that has been legally violated and a country that is unlawfully violent. In fact, governmental machinery of divination claims that its legitimacy is growing.
Democracy in a democratic country
But what does democracy really mean if a conspiracy against Donald Trump, a stupid Islamophobe like Narendra Modi, a terrorist like Jair Bolsonaro, or a whole European dictatorship is successful?
As the US moves in fear of Donald Trump and desperately tries to find hope in Biden, the ruling Shia religious leaders in Iran are stepping up their war crimes that have plagued them since the first day they thought they had an Islamic Republic in their name. As a result, they rule in a cruel and unjust manner – such as the Sisi army in Egypt, or the Assad regime in Syria.
As the dictatorial regime in Iran demonstrates democracy and feeds its shocking and obedient audience, Iranians inside and outside the country are waving and directing their regimes to other satellite sites that the Saudis pay and work with – clean-shaven dudes and anchors like Barbie compete with them for their good. For there is no business equivalent to democracy.
The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the editor of Al Jazeera.
