From socialist and communist systems to liberal, capitalist and even monarchy or mixed systems of government, they can all succeed in a country that is compatible with the intellectual and political culture of the people of that country and that the people can relate to them. To put on.
There are many examples of countries that have chosen the structure of democracy for their government that has been torn apart and there are countries that have chosen the structure of democracy for themselves and have been very successful and people are happy with it.
The same example can be extended to socialist or communist countries.
While we observe that the same system in the former Soviet Union leads to its collapse, we see the same system in China, for example, that the country faces unimaginable growth.
As I mentioned earlier, it is important for people to be able to relate to that political structure.
For centuries, Iran had a monarchy, and about a hundred years ago, when some Iranian youth traveled abroad and became acquainted with the political structures of other countries, they thought that the political structure of the country should be changed and the constitutional revolution launched. And at the time they thought the best structure that could be implemented for Iran was the same as the English political one.
John Napoleon's uncle's story, of course, cannot be ignored, and the British intervention was not without effect.
Anyway, his name is on it.
English political structure.
This political structure was built for the British country and people, not for Iran and the Iranian people.
The British people had many years to come to this political structure and could not get the same structure and implemented it directly in Iran, but the young people outside were so influenced by foreign political culture that they did not realize that the country had its own political structure. Iran's political structure needs and cannot be prescribed for another country.
Anyway, I do not want to open the hundred-year-old debate, but Imam Khomeini realized this and went for a structure that seemed to benefit Iran and the Iranian people and provided that political structure and the Iranian people with their revolution And the vote they gave to the Islamic Republic endorsed that political structure, the Islamic State.
The point is that although more than 98% of voters voted for the Islamic regime's political system, many did not realize that this was not the end of the story but the beginning of the story.
Iran was transitioning from one political system to another, but many people were still under the influence of the previous one.
In the new political system based on religious democracy, people have to vote and people's votes are very important, whereas in the structure of the previous political system people's votes were not important at all.
Politicians in Iran, too, failed to adapt to the new political system, and instead of seeking to form popular parties, we saw that anyone who came to power tried to create his own political system.
In a political system based on democracy, the person who reaches the top of the pyramid begins to rise from the foot of the pyramid to reach the summit, but in Iran the person who comes to power in any way, such as the president, now thinks Failure to create its own political party, and in political cultures we call this structure the structure of the upside down pyramid, once that person loses his or her power, the whole pyramid collapses.
But the question that arises here is whether he came to power or those who brought him to power?
Given that we have no stable party system in Iran, making people want to vote on a list is the biggest mistake that can happen.
Because it is unclear what abilities are on the list and what they are ultimately looking for.
As experience has shown, people have blindfolded a trusted politician, for example, in the hope that if the whole list enters parliament it will have the power to do something, but even once it has become a voter. Didn't ask well what are they going to do in the parliament?
Lists that none of the candidates on the list even put forward the goals of their entry into parliament to respect the voters.
Then what do you expect?
That some candidates want to make such promises during the election and that none of them come to the House is one of the issues raised.
People need to be demanding and ask the candidates to present their programs and realize that if they cannot run then they must be held accountable, go to parliament, say no and now let us vote again It may well be some kind of insult to the mind of the audience, and it's good to blame someone else if they go and vote for that candidate again.
We see, for example, some members of parliament four years in, and even during those four years we have not heard their voices, or they have resigned and even become very busy, then regrouped for the next election. They are called.
However, if people's problem is not resolved, one of the reasons is that they do not investigate their representatives.
In some countries of the world this is done by the parties, who are the ones who reject the candidates from their filters and then expose their candidates to the people and present a plan that they will do if they enter parliament. Even if they can't run those programs, they really use it all together.
In Iran, given that we do not have parties, it is more about the people and the voters, and the voters should realize that their vote value is very high and that they should not go to the polls, and if they do not vote for a candidate, then whatever So does their neck.
Today, in many countries, when they want to vote for someone, they search the internet to get acquainted with the opinions of the candidates and then look to see what the candidate is voting for and what the program is. Whether or not they are in line with their wishes, today in Iran we are in a situation where our people have to realize that they have to bother electing delegates to solve their problems, or if people are still unwilling to bother about candidates. To kill is certainly not going to solve any of their problems.
The points raised in this article are the views and opinions of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Sputnik editorial board.