Adonis Diaries

“Why I was not asked to vote?”

A young man took the podium and talked. He said:

“You the immigrants (converts to Islam who moved from Mecca to Medina); it is true that you were the first to embrace Islam.  But everyone later received the same privilege. 

After the Prophet death (632 AC) you have designated a man among you (first caliph Abu Bakr) to become the first successor; we, the common Moslems, were not consulted.

Again, you the elite immigrants have met in council (Shawra) and designated the second Caliph (Omar bin al Khattab) and we were not asked our opinion. 

You voted for the third Caliph (Othman Bin Affan) without our input.

You didn’t like Othman after 13 years of ruling us, and you assassinated him. 

You again designated Ali bin Abi Taleb for fourth caliph and the common Moslems were not invited to extend their opinions and preferences. 

Now you don’t like Ali.  What are you reproaching him for? Why have you decided to fight him by the sword? 

Has he done any reprehensible acts?  Is his election illegal, illicit or fraudulent?

Tell us why you want us to start a civil war (fitna)? You have got to surely convince us to join the battle. 

Tell us what it is all about? Why are you fighting?”

These are not current statements of a Moslem, Sunni or Shia or of another Islam sect. They were pronounced by a simple Moslem 1,400 years ago, during the first Islam civil war called the Battle of the Camel.

Aicha emulated the same tactics as the Prophet did before any military excursion: She negotiated with notables in Basra, explained the reasons of her dangerous move (it was to be the first civil war in Islam) and she opened free discussions for people to express their opinions in the mosque.

Mosques were the proper locations for open discussions under the protection of Allah.

Since time immemorial, the most common form of electing leaders is the peer council forum, (or Shawra in Islam) in political and professional voting systems.

It took the American revolution over 6 decades before attempting a modified form of universal voting system during President Andrew Jackson.

Pragmatically, the peer format is still practiced in the most democratic and developed States. It is the peer council that select the candidate, finance and organize political campaigns.

Even today, most political parties put forth the ideology that peer systems are the most viable systems in order to select experienced and reliable candidates who proved to be consistent and have conforming attitudes to the status quo.

Most political leaders who managed to succeed in their revolutions were convinced that no power can rely on the common people to snatch, sustain and consolidate institutions.

Peasants were historically catalogue as the most conservative and retrograde of citizens. The core members, and professional intelligentsia were considered to be the backbone for any renewal.

The leaders relied on a circle of experienced and professional activist and manipulators to organize, lead and control the movement of the masses.

The rhetoric and speeches of the political leaders fool the crowd into believing that they are the real power and that what is being done in their name is what’s best for them and for the nation.

May be peer councils is the case pragmatically, but universal voting systems, supported by a fair election law, have this major benefit of short-cutting the advent of virulent, violent and bloody insurgency movements.

Societies need a large span of peaceful continuity and stability in the laws in order to consolidate legitimacy and strengthen the institutions and to insure steady development.

The fact is that the developed superpower colonial States have devised a couple of Default political systems for the developing countries to emulate. For example, Democracy is in and Liberty is out. Free trades is in and self sufficiency is out… Otherwise, all hell of State supported media will come down on these retrograde political systems