"All Libyans are to blame for the utter failure of the political leadership..." This is an oft repeated phrase I have seen when people discuss the disastrous state of politics as practiced in Libya. While this sounds poetic and democratically valid it is also wrong. If everyone is to "blame" then no-one is to "blame." While it is possible that all Libyans are at fault, some bear more guilt than others. For example, most Libyans didn't vote and the ones that did were total novices when it comes to the democratic system and its concomitant processes. They faced a bewildering array of candidates and political parties during the brief run-up to the July 2012 elections.
Choice is a must when it comes to Democracy, however too much choice is not the ideal way to foster good electioneering and the actual voting process. Not enough time was given to voter education and campaigning was haphazard which might have been heavily impacted by the lack of civic groups, voter forums, or town-hall debates to introduce candidates and their respective platforms.
Modern political campaigns use both art and science to help sway voters and educate them at the same time. Libyan society is not used to democratic political tricks, advertising, or even how the media has an influence on voter turnout and voting patterns. This will take some time to develop among the populace but the political parties themselves shoulder the majority of the blame for the state of anarchy that exists in Libya. As a Libyan-American, I care most about what happens in both nations. Also as a person who has grown up and spent the majority of my life in the USA, I have grown to admire and respect the political system created to serve the citizens of the USA. I think it serves as a good model for Libya and something we should learn from.
Let me give you an example: Why is it that the USA, which allows for many different political parties, is dominated by only two? The short answer is that this is the most stable and efficient system. Historically Democrats have pandered to the lower classes and Republicans to the Middle and Upper Classes. However, both parties, especially after the demise of the Communist alternative, now have relatively similar economic platforms. Whether or not that is due to external manipulation by Corporate interests is debatable but that is beyond the scope of my article. Socially, they are very dissimilar. One is very liberal and the other is much more conservative. One is associated with racial minorities and the other has in the past been associated more with WASPs and other religiously oriented groups.
Libya would benefit by having social conservatives/nationalists unite into one party and liberals and secularists into another. They can compete for votes and prepare and communicate their vision and goals to the Libyan nation and let the voters decide for themselves what course they'd like to take. The important thing to remember is social change or "evolution" is not a linear progression. It can zigzag and be more of an oscillation between liberal and conservative poles. The main reason fanatics of either stripe are especially poor leaders of a polyglot society is that they are too stubborn or stuck to their one way or the highway type of thinking. Pragmatic approaches must be found that allow for flexibility, innovation, and ethics to predominate among leaders of the New Libya.
Political parties serve a critical function by vetting and organizing candidates so that there is a coherent choice that voters can make. Who wants to see fifty candidates for president each represented by a symbol and the cutest logo or symbol is the one that gets the most votes. Political parties also craft their own platform and have the means to keep their party members in line or kick them out of the party as the case may be. There are many ways to solve the political crisis in Libya and my hope is that steps are taken to remedy the problems as soon as possible.
Choice is a must when it comes to Democracy, however too much choice is not the ideal way to foster good electioneering and the actual voting process. Not enough time was given to voter education and campaigning was haphazard which might have been heavily impacted by the lack of civic groups, voter forums, or town-hall debates to introduce candidates and their respective platforms.
Modern political campaigns use both art and science to help sway voters and educate them at the same time. Libyan society is not used to democratic political tricks, advertising, or even how the media has an influence on voter turnout and voting patterns. This will take some time to develop among the populace but the political parties themselves shoulder the majority of the blame for the state of anarchy that exists in Libya. As a Libyan-American, I care most about what happens in both nations. Also as a person who has grown up and spent the majority of my life in the USA, I have grown to admire and respect the political system created to serve the citizens of the USA. I think it serves as a good model for Libya and something we should learn from.
Let me give you an example: Why is it that the USA, which allows for many different political parties, is dominated by only two? The short answer is that this is the most stable and efficient system. Historically Democrats have pandered to the lower classes and Republicans to the Middle and Upper Classes. However, both parties, especially after the demise of the Communist alternative, now have relatively similar economic platforms. Whether or not that is due to external manipulation by Corporate interests is debatable but that is beyond the scope of my article. Socially, they are very dissimilar. One is very liberal and the other is much more conservative. One is associated with racial minorities and the other has in the past been associated more with WASPs and other religiously oriented groups.
Libya would benefit by having social conservatives/nationalists unite into one party and liberals and secularists into another. They can compete for votes and prepare and communicate their vision and goals to the Libyan nation and let the voters decide for themselves what course they'd like to take. The important thing to remember is social change or "evolution" is not a linear progression. It can zigzag and be more of an oscillation between liberal and conservative poles. The main reason fanatics of either stripe are especially poor leaders of a polyglot society is that they are too stubborn or stuck to their one way or the highway type of thinking. Pragmatic approaches must be found that allow for flexibility, innovation, and ethics to predominate among leaders of the New Libya.
Political parties serve a critical function by vetting and organizing candidates so that there is a coherent choice that voters can make. Who wants to see fifty candidates for president each represented by a symbol and the cutest logo or symbol is the one that gets the most votes. Political parties also craft their own platform and have the means to keep their party members in line or kick them out of the party as the case may be. There are many ways to solve the political crisis in Libya and my hope is that steps are taken to remedy the problems as soon as possible.
