Last year on international women's day, I wrote a blog post on what the 8th of March is and what it isn't. I felt that was needed; a surprising amount of people want to congratulate women or bring them gifts or congratulate them for being women. Why this is completely wrong you can read there.
This year I want to focus on something recent, something beautiful, but something still troubling. I wrote a while back on women in Egypt's revolution and how they had been made invisible. Lately, the media has started picking up on the importance of women in the front lines of the revolution, demonstrating side by side with the men, women from different religions, backgrounds, with different stories, but the same goal. Even Naomi Wolf wrote a piece on it for Al Jazeera and it involved no rape apologia (!) even though it was far from original.
As the revolution has spread to Libya and other countries, women are still out there, they are still shouting and they are still fighting for freedom and democracy. These women are very much a part of bringing about a freer and fairer society with the hope of being a part of that as well. I did express my worry in the above blog post on women not being properly included in a reconstruction of an Egyptian society, and I stressed the importance of making sure that they were included in order to guarantee a fully free and equal society. But as it seems, sadly, the women were welcome as long as they were needed to further men's goals and needs, and are today being pushed back to their traditional roles - a pattern that is all too obvious in conflict and upheaval where women are expected to participate or support but later return to their assigned duties when it is all over.
Today, these women are once again braving the streets, in a country where it is estimated that 80% of the women have been sexually harassed and much of it takes place in public places, to demand their rights and recognition for the role that they played in overthrowing the Mubarak regime. As this post is being written, there are reports of harassment and violence targeted against the international women's day protest in Tahrir Square, Cairo. (I will update with a proper news article when I find one.) What is said to have happened is that men have entered the square, harassing women and using violence to stop them from demanding their rights. In essence, it is an anti-feminist, anti-women's rights counter protest. The women have served their purpose - they helped overthrow the regime - now when the men have reached equality and freedom, we can go back to the status quo and continue harassing and oppressing women.
Women for Women are organising an event today called on the bridge standing in solidarity with all the women around the world whose voices are not heard, calling for peace and an end to violence against women. They are standing with the women from Afghanistan who continue being excluded from reconstruction processes; with women from Rwanda and the Democratic Republic of Congo, where rape is used systematically as a tactic of war and terror; and with all other women trying to make a difference, like the women in Egypt today, and the women in the Ivory Coast, where women have been killed today in a protest.
Today it is international women's day. It is a day when we are supposed to celebrate what we have accomplished in the past in terms of women's civil and political advancement. It is a day to celebrate the present and all the brilliant women and men who work so hard to include women and make their voices heard. And it is a day to try to change the future, to shout to be seen and heard and included. The violence and harassment against women who are simply trying to demand what should be theirs already - respect, autonomy and being heard - is sad.
These events, the violence against women and the violation of their rights of assembly and walking down the streets without being sexually harassed, shows the importance of this day. This day is important, because today, and only today, the spotlight is on the women. Media all over the world are reporting on events, protests and have in depth analysis of women's movements, women's rights and all things women. For years, women in Egypt have not been able to walk the streets safely, as they are not today, but today the world is watching and crying out in sheer horror. These women and their bravery have always been beautiful, but today it is visible too. Today, these kinds of events are allowed to be seen and heard and discussed.
It has been 100 years since international women's day was established. We have done a lot of fantastic things but, as today's events show, where women are not even allowed to protest for their rights, we still have a long way to go. Don't quit just yet.
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label democracy. Show all posts
Tuesday, March 08, 2011
Friday, May 07, 2010
General Election 2010 Reflections
I love democracy. It’s absolutely beautiful. And I love politics, it’s so versatile and alive and ever-changing. I think I want political babies named Democracy and Liberty, good names and good concepts.
It’s the election hype that has gotten me this fired up. The UK had a general election yesterday, and living in the country I can’t very well avoid it. Being a politics student, I don’t want to avoid it. It’s like the UK has had this shimmer lying over it, covering it. It smells of anticipation and of change. Although the democracy shimmer has slightly subdued as the election is over, the image of it is fresh in my memory. It is beautiful. If I could, I would take a swim in this democracy shimmer surrounding me with the power and voices of the people.
The election had a rather interesting outcome. None of the parties won the majority and it is now a so called “hung parliament.” Being Swedish I find this whole stress over a coalition government pretty entertaining. We have always had coalition governments and that’s how I prefer it. In fact, I think that the current set up of two opposing blocs or alliances in Swedish politics is downright dangerous for democracy and doesn’t offer the voter enough choices. It is not representative enough. I think hung is good and that coalitions lead to a higher rate of democracy.
The interesting bit is going to be to see how this whole coalition is going to play out. At the moment all the power lies in the hands of the Liberal Democrat party leader, Nick Clegg. Is he going to take the Conservatives up on their offer to form a coalition government? Would he be letting his voters down by doing so since the Lib Dems seem much closer to Labour in policies? Most importantly, how is he going to address this half-ass attempt Conservative leader David Cameron made of setting up a committee looking into the current unfairness of the voting system? Not to mention that Cameron stated that he wants to keep a first past the post system, which is basically what keeps on losing seats for the Lib Dems. How is Clegg going to reconcile his strong beliefs in fair representation with the clearly not-so-fair representation system that the Tories want?
On the other hand, if Clegg were to turn down the Conservative offer of forming a coalition government, he would be bypassing the party that won the largest share of the popular votes and seats in parliament to form a government with a party that the electorate has clearly rejected. Can that be justified? A Lib-Lab coalition would still not reach the majority needed to safely pass legislation through parliament.
Yes, it is interesting to say the least.
I know I am not allowed to vote in this country. As a Swedish citizen, I really have no say on how the electoral system should be shaped, but as a human being I am allowed to an opinion. And furthermore, as a strong believer in democracy I cannot stand idly by and not have an opinion as this general election has proven that the UK has a severely unfair system. The Lib Dems won around 23% of the popular vote but ended up with 57, giving them less than 10% of seats in parliament. That hardly seems fair.
I hope the electoral system will be reformed in Britain, to a proper proportional representation system. Something like Mixed Member Proportional Representation where people could easily affect both which candidates they send to parliament as well as parties. Or perhaps something like we have in Sweden with a list of party candidates already printed on an open list and where people can vote for particular persons if they so wish, but if they do not, the choice of the candidates will go to the party. Although, as someone pointed out over at the BookCrossing forums today, that can lead to candidates in parliament who have technically not been elected but appointed by the party leadership, a rather elitist tactic, and one which makes sure that the power seat in each party can put their drones into parliament.
One last thing, for those scaremongers who claim that the BNP would gain 10 or more seats through a proportional representation system, that is simply not true. A proportional system often comes with a threshold that any party is required to pass before being allowed into parliament. In Sweden it is 4%, but some countries have higher. This is to avoid an unlimited number of parties in parliament that only represent a minuscule proportion of the country and it also works as a safeguard against extremist parties. With the BNP’s meagre 1,9% of the popular vote, this would be well below the threshold.
It’s the election hype that has gotten me this fired up. The UK had a general election yesterday, and living in the country I can’t very well avoid it. Being a politics student, I don’t want to avoid it. It’s like the UK has had this shimmer lying over it, covering it. It smells of anticipation and of change. Although the democracy shimmer has slightly subdued as the election is over, the image of it is fresh in my memory. It is beautiful. If I could, I would take a swim in this democracy shimmer surrounding me with the power and voices of the people.
The election had a rather interesting outcome. None of the parties won the majority and it is now a so called “hung parliament.” Being Swedish I find this whole stress over a coalition government pretty entertaining. We have always had coalition governments and that’s how I prefer it. In fact, I think that the current set up of two opposing blocs or alliances in Swedish politics is downright dangerous for democracy and doesn’t offer the voter enough choices. It is not representative enough. I think hung is good and that coalitions lead to a higher rate of democracy.
The interesting bit is going to be to see how this whole coalition is going to play out. At the moment all the power lies in the hands of the Liberal Democrat party leader, Nick Clegg. Is he going to take the Conservatives up on their offer to form a coalition government? Would he be letting his voters down by doing so since the Lib Dems seem much closer to Labour in policies? Most importantly, how is he going to address this half-ass attempt Conservative leader David Cameron made of setting up a committee looking into the current unfairness of the voting system? Not to mention that Cameron stated that he wants to keep a first past the post system, which is basically what keeps on losing seats for the Lib Dems. How is Clegg going to reconcile his strong beliefs in fair representation with the clearly not-so-fair representation system that the Tories want?
On the other hand, if Clegg were to turn down the Conservative offer of forming a coalition government, he would be bypassing the party that won the largest share of the popular votes and seats in parliament to form a government with a party that the electorate has clearly rejected. Can that be justified? A Lib-Lab coalition would still not reach the majority needed to safely pass legislation through parliament.
Yes, it is interesting to say the least.
I know I am not allowed to vote in this country. As a Swedish citizen, I really have no say on how the electoral system should be shaped, but as a human being I am allowed to an opinion. And furthermore, as a strong believer in democracy I cannot stand idly by and not have an opinion as this general election has proven that the UK has a severely unfair system. The Lib Dems won around 23% of the popular vote but ended up with 57, giving them less than 10% of seats in parliament. That hardly seems fair.
I hope the electoral system will be reformed in Britain, to a proper proportional representation system. Something like Mixed Member Proportional Representation where people could easily affect both which candidates they send to parliament as well as parties. Or perhaps something like we have in Sweden with a list of party candidates already printed on an open list and where people can vote for particular persons if they so wish, but if they do not, the choice of the candidates will go to the party. Although, as someone pointed out over at the BookCrossing forums today, that can lead to candidates in parliament who have technically not been elected but appointed by the party leadership, a rather elitist tactic, and one which makes sure that the power seat in each party can put their drones into parliament.
One last thing, for those scaremongers who claim that the BNP would gain 10 or more seats through a proportional representation system, that is simply not true. A proportional system often comes with a threshold that any party is required to pass before being allowed into parliament. In Sweden it is 4%, but some countries have higher. This is to avoid an unlimited number of parties in parliament that only represent a minuscule proportion of the country and it also works as a safeguard against extremist parties. With the BNP’s meagre 1,9% of the popular vote, this would be well below the threshold.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)