la democratie n'est pas bonne pour les arabes?

[sidlhaj]

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/wo...yt&oref=slogin

article en anglais

En substance ca dit que les kuwaitiens, on se comparant avec les emirats d'a cote, n'aiment pas trop leur system democratique. Qui est pourtant l'un des plus evolues dans le monde arabe, au dire du journal.
leur voisin de Dubai connaissent une belle efervescence economique, le Qatar aussi. alors ils se demandent si le fait d'avoir un regime totalitaire mais qui sait gouvernes et prendre des decisions pro-business n'est pas bien mieux qu'un parlement elu democratiquement a puissantes prerogatifes mais qui nage dans le chaos.

ca rejoint un article que j'ai lu ce matin qui dit que jusqu'a 1967, les mariage mixte ete interdit par la loi.
j'avais lu avant aussi qu'en suisse la femme n'a vait pas le droit de voter jusqu'au debut des annees 70.

alors la question est : quelles sont les prerequis pour que la democratie s'installe et soit efficace?

[sidlhaj]

In a vast, high-ceilinged tent, Ali al-Rashed sounded an anguished note as he delivered the first speech of his campaign for Parliament.

Skip to next paragraph
Multimedia
Slide Show
A State of Frustration
Enlarge This Image

Bryan Denton for The New York Times
Politics was the topic two weeks ago during a typical social gathering in a Kuwait City basement. More Photos »
“Kuwait used to be No. 1 in the economy, in politics, in sports, in culture, in everything,” he said, his voice floating out in the warm evening air to hundreds of potential voters seated on white damask-lined chairs. “What happened?”

It is a question many people are asking as this tiny, oil-rich nation of 2.6 million people approaches its latest round of elections. And the unlikely answer being whispered around, both here and in neighboring countries on the Persian Gulf: too much democracy.

In a region where autocracy is the rule, Kuwait is a remarkable exception, with a powerful and truculent elected Parliament that sets the emir’s salary and is the nation’s sole source of legislation. Women gained the right to vote and run for office two years ago, and a popular movement won further electoral changes.

Despite those gains, Kuwait has been overshadowed by its dynamic neighbors — Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar — where economies are booming under absolute monarchies. Efforts to overhaul Kuwait’s sclerotic welfare state have stalled in its fractious and divided Parliament, and scandals led the emir to dissolve the chamber last month for the second time in less than two years, forcing new elections.

All this has left many Kuwaitis deeply disenchanted with their 50-member elected legislature. The collapse of the Bush administration’s efforts to promote democracy in the region and the continuing chaos in Iraq, just to the north — once heralded as the birthplace of a new democratic model — have also contributed to a popular suspicion that democracy itself is one Western import that has not lived up to its advertising.

“People say democracy is just slowing us down, and that we’d be better off if we were more like Dubai,” said Waleed al-Sager, 24, who is advising his father’s campaign for Parliament.

Like many Kuwaitis, Mr. Sager quickly distanced himself from that view. But as the May 17 parliamentary elections approach, with near-constant coverage in a dozen new newspapers and on satellite television stations, candidates refer again and again to a “halat ihbaat” — state of frustration. His father, Mohammed al-Sager, a longtime member of Parliament, delivered his own opening campaign speech shortly after Mr. Rashed two weeks ago, and spent much of it urgently reminding his listeners of the need for an elected assembly.

“Some people have called for a permanent dissolution of Parliament,” he said, his face telecast on an enormous screen to a thick overflow crowd outside the tent. “But everywhere in the world — in Africa, in Palestine, in the old Soviet Union — people have turned to elections to solve their problems, not away from them. Whatever problems we have in our Parliament, we must remember that it is much better than no Parliament at all.”

One source of frustration has been the failure to reform Kuwait’s state-controlled economy. After the 2006 elections, many Kuwaitis were hoping for changes to cumbersome government rules that allow land to be allocated for business projects. Instead, the effort was blocked in Parliament. The slow pace of efforts to privatize the national airline and parts of the oil sector has also caused disappointment.

Many Kuwaitis also complain about government neglect of public hospitals and schools. Problems with the power grid caused brownouts last summer.

Although parts of Kuwait City were rebuilt after the Iraqi invasion of 1990, much of it looks faded and tatty, a striking contrast with the gleaming hyper-modernity of Dubai, Abu Dhabi and Qatar.

The current political malaise is especially striking because most Kuwaitis take pride in their nation’s relatively democratic traditions. The ruling Sabah family acquired its position not through conquest, but with an agreement among the coastal traders of the region in the mid-18th century. After Kuwait gained independence from the British in 1961, the emir approved a written Constitution that sharply limited his power in relation to Parliament.

[sidlhaj]

“This ruling family is different from any other ruling family in the region,” said Ghanim al-Najjar, a newspaper columnist and professor of political science at Kuwait University. “They are part of the political process, not on top of it.”

Skip to next paragraph
Enlarge This Image

Bryan Denton for The New York Times
Much of Kuwait City’s financial district lies in disrepair, in contrast to the gleaming modernity of Dubai and other neighbors. More Photos >

Multimedia
Slide Show
A State of Frustration In some ways, Kuwait is the most democratic country in the Arab world, aside from Lebanon. There are Arab republics — in Yemen, Egypt, Algeria, Syria, Iraq and Tunisia — but despite their democratic forms, those countries have generally been more autocratic and repressive than the region’s monarchies. Even in Lebanon, democracy is limited by a sectarian system of power-sharing.

In Kuwait, by contrast, tensions between the majority Sunnis and minority Shiites are minimal. Kuwaitis of all backgrounds mix socially at diwaniyas, the traditional evening gatherings where political and social gossip is shared over tea and coffee. There is some conflict between Islamists and liberals in Parliament, but with no officially recognized political parties, ideology is flexible and shifting.

And while there have been setbacks — the royal family suspended Parliament in the late 1970s and again in the late 1980s — Kuwait has grown steadily more democratic. Two years ago, popular pressure forced a change in the electoral districting law, making it harder to buy votes. Women gained the right to vote and run in elections (though none have won seats). In mid-April, Kuwaiti democrats won yet another battle after the government tried to pass a law restricting public gatherings. There were popular demonstrations against the proposal, and the government backed down.

But those civic freedoms have come alongside signs of real frustration. Despite the world’s fifth largest oil reserves, many Kuwaitis are upset with the absence of business and investment opportunity, at least as compared with other countries nearby.

At a recent campaign rally, Abdul Rahman al-Anjari, a candidate for Parliament, pounded his fist on the lectern as he recited statistics showing that capital outflow and inflow in Kuwait was a small fraction of the numbers in the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and Bahrain.

“What does this mean?” Mr. Anjari said, standing in front of a vast banner bearing his name and those of three other candidates who favor privatization. “It means we are losing jobs to other gulf countries, and for no reason!”

It is unlikely that many Kuwaitis would be willing to trade their political rights and freedoms for more economic opportunity. But the notion that democracy is somehow holding Kuwait back is common.

“It’s true, the friction in our politics delays things,” said Kamel Harami, an oil analyst. “The sheik of Abu Dhabi can say, ‘Go build this,’ and it’s done. He doesn’t have me, the press, the TV stations, the Parliament, getting in his way. But what people need to understand is that democracy isn’t the problem; it’s that democracy isn’t being used correctly.”

Some Kuwaitis say the current emir, Sheik Sabah al-Ahmed al-Sabah, has deliberately fostered the idea that Parliament is the root of the country’s problems. When he called for new elections in March, the emir pointedly urged Kuwaitis to elect a Parliament that would help develop the country.

There is an authoritarian wing of the royal family that has long wanted to curtail Parliament’s powers, as happened in the late ’70s and the late ’80s. The royal family, which appoints the executive branch, has also used its influence to support parliamentary candidates from Kuwait’s more tribally oriented “Bedouin” population, because they were more pliant and less interested in political reform. They are also generally less wealthy, and many say the Bedouins (who no longer live in the desert as their ancestors did) are now resisting economic reforms because they believe they would not benefit from them as much as Kuwait’s urban merchant elite would.

But Parliament has its own share of responsibility. Reform legislation on foreign investment and other issues has consistently stalled. Parliament has also set off embarrassing controversies, when members subjected ministers from the non-elected executive branch to public questioning sessions — a practice known in Kuwait as grilling — intended to humiliate or force a resignation. It was a grilling of the defense minister, and the prospect of a similar clash with the prime minister, that appears to have pushed the emir to dissolve Parliament.

Many younger Kuwaitis who took part here in what they called the Orange revolution two years ago, when street demonstrations helped press the government to overhaul the country’s election districting law, now seem cynical. One popular Kuwaiti blog posted a poem lamenting the absence of real change on the political scene, ending with the lines: “Restart does not work / neither does Turn Off / and we can’t leave the country on Stand By.”

Still, as the candidates troop from one diwaniya to the next in search of votes, any sort of retreat from democratic values seems unlikely.

“There are people who want to say, Look at democracy, look at what it causes,’ ” said Nawaf al-Mutairi, a business student. “But we know democracy is our last hope. The problem is just that democracy is incremental.”

[sidlhaj]

Al Jazeera en parle aussi:
http://www.aljazeera.net/NR/exeres/5...B1A38E7328.htm

[laminabil]

C'est possible pour les arabes

mais pas pour les maghrébins

[sat95]

"la démocratie" dans sa définition actuelle est un modèle taillé pour la société occidentale qui est la base d'un système capitaliste. Contrairement au modèle disant "naturel" où la force est "physique" ce modèle puise sa puissance dans "l'argent" tout s'achète et tout se vends .
Un régime est dit démocratique si les intérêt occidentaux y trouvent place.

[laminabil]

Envoyé par sat95 "la démocratie" dans sa définition actuelle est un modèle taillé pour la société occidentale qui est la base d'un système capitaliste. Contrairement au modèle disant "naturel" où la force est "physique" ce modèle puise sa puissance dans "l'argent" tout s'achète et tout se vends . Un régime est dit démocratique si les intérêt occidentaux y trouvent place.

Taillé pour la société occidentale!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!

Physique!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!

L'argent!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !!!!!!!!!!!!!!


Je ne comprends pas!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! tu veux dire seule la religion est l'expression de l'humain???????????????? dis le directement, c'est plus net

[sidlhaj]

la democratie c'est quand le peuple s'auto gouverne
et si ce peuple est fait en majorite d'ignorants?
deja en amerique on voit bien ce que ca donne quand le systeme democratique est bien la mais que les massmedia manipule la population vers un tel ou un tel choix.
ca ce sont les mauvais exemple.

[gomeboy]

Envoyé par sidlhaj http://www.nytimes.com/2008/05/06/wo...yt&oref=slogin article en anglais En substance ca dit que les kuwaitiens, on se comparant avec les emirats d'a cote, n'aiment pas trop leur system democratique. Qui est pourtant l'un des plus evolues dans le monde arabe, au dire du journal. leur voisin de Dubai connaissent une belle efervescence economique, le Qatar aussi. alors ils se demandent si le fait d'avoir un regime totalitaire mais qui sait gouvernes et prendre des decisions pro-business n'est pas bien mieux qu'un parlement elu democratiquement a puissantes prerogatifes mais qui nage dans le chaos. ca rejoint un article que j'ai lu ce matin qui dit que jusqu'a 1967, les mariage mixte ete interdit par la loi. j'avais lu avant aussi qu'en suisse la femme n'a vait pas le droit de voter jusqu'au debut des annees 70. alors la question est : quelles sont les prerequis pour que la democratie s'installe et soit efficace?

les prerequis sont des peuples eduquées , pas extremistes dans leurs pensées , il n'ya pas de democratie sans libertes , alors qu'on arrette les delires genre il faut appliquer l'islam charia et bla bla , l'islam on l'applique pour soi et regardent vers le futur pas le passé

[EllMo]

La Chine montre bien qu'on peut allier totalitarisme et production économique.