If anybody says that the recently held elections were relatively clean, and orderly - save for a few "anomalies" - hit them on the head for me. Hard. As in. Masakit. Hagulgol sakit
( Read more... )
I doubt it's as much being satisfied with the not-quite-free-elections as it is appreciating how it's improved compared to the bloodshed back then.
I agree with you about how that statement trivializes the suffering of the people in areas that were subjected to election violence, and how many people died in election-related killings, and how it's still not enough, since even being a little bit unfair makes it unfair.
I'll agree also with your hypothetical speaker that..
They were relatively more orderly than other elections.
"Okay, fine. The elections weren't all clean and orderly. But mostly they were."
But I stop where he/she says "...And that's okay." It's better than the previous elections, in terms of death tolls, fraud, and general election law-breaking, granted, and I'll take any gains in this direction over none, but no, it's not enough. Until corruption, fraud, and violence are 100% gone, it's not enough.
It's better than the previous elections, in terms of death tolls, fraud, and general election law-breaking.
that's the thing though. the fact that there was a death toll to speak of and fraud to actually detail in the front page, makes this election no different from the past.
maybe it's too idealistic and I guess, militant of me to wish for it to be completely clean. but looking at these election-related deaths should not be about how many had died, but really about whether people had to die at all. In the end, it should not make a difference whether 10 or 1000 died. Either way, people died needlessly.
Yes, I too am dissatisfied about the death tolls, as well as the other things.
But, this is more of a "taking every plus we can get" issue than a satisfaction issue man. People died needlessly, and they shouldn't. But since we can't act superhero at every location, I think it's more of taking worse news over the worst.
Would you rather read 1000 people died or 10 people died? No offense to the 10 people who will die either way, but if I had a choice, I'd pick 10 over 1000. That's what these people (and me included) mean.
We're not satisfied that sh!t happens, but, at the very least, there is less than what were used to having. And it's clearly a step in the right direction. Soon, maybe we'll have an election which will have 0 bloodshed.
Comments 3
I agree with you about how that statement trivializes the suffering of the people in areas that were subjected to election violence, and how many people died in election-related killings, and how it's still not enough, since even being a little bit unfair makes it unfair.
I'll agree also with your hypothetical speaker that..
But I stop where he/she says "...And that's okay." It's better than the previous elections, in terms of death tolls, fraud, and general election law-breaking, granted, and I'll take any gains in this direction over none, but no, it's not enough. Until corruption, fraud, and violence are 100% gone, it's not enough.
Reply
that's the thing though. the fact that there was a death toll to speak of and fraud to actually detail in the front page, makes this election no different from the past.
maybe it's too idealistic and I guess, militant of me to wish for it to be completely clean. but looking at these election-related deaths should not be about how many had died, but really about whether people had to die at all. In the end, it should not make a difference whether 10 or 1000 died. Either way, people died needlessly.
Reply
But, this is more of a "taking every plus we can get" issue than a satisfaction issue man. People died needlessly, and they shouldn't. But since we can't act superhero at every location, I think it's more of taking worse news over the worst.
Would you rather read 1000 people died or 10 people died? No offense to the 10 people who will die either way, but if I had a choice, I'd pick 10 over 1000. That's what these people (and me included) mean.
We're not satisfied that sh!t happens, but, at the very least, there is less than what were used to having. And it's clearly a step in the right direction. Soon, maybe we'll have an election which will have 0 bloodshed.
Reply
Leave a comment