That would be half of all the local governments.
But how does this percentage compare to 10 years ago? 20 years ago?
Well, I take your point(s) but might have a different slant on some of their activities. As I mentioned earleir, there are many thousands of princes and god knows how many princesses so generalizing about their activities is dangerous. When you talk about “they run schools” etc. Which “they” are you talking about? The clerics run the schools, obviously. The royals simply pay them off. I would bet money that the royals don’t give a damn what the clerics do with the money as long as they will publicly praise the generous royal as a religious benefactor.
As far as the royals liking our way of life but knowing which side their bread is buttered on. The royals do not lead our kind of life. You would probably find it difficult to comprehend the kind of life many of them lead. I certainly do, and I live here and interact with them occasionally.
The royals lead their own kind of life which has less to do with adopting Western styles and more to do with doing any damn thing they want to whenever they feel like it. The arrogance is incredible. Average Jor Saudi doesn’t like that any better than people in the US would.
Regards
Testy
These will be the first elections in the Kingdom’s history. Up to now there have been no elected government officials. Heck, the schools do not even have student governments.
Then it is progress of a kind, and maybe a good sign. The royals are obviously terrified of democracy, and aware that their people have absolutely no experience with it – yet they also know they will come under constant pressure from the West to democratize. So they’re trying it out on an experimental basis under safe, controlled conditions. If a few years go by and these new elected local councils do not become a voice for Wahhabi extremists and other anti-royalist hotheads, then maybe they’ll allow elected councils to the rest of the local governments, and maybe, a few years after that, elected parliaments for the provinces, and maybe, a few years after that, an elected national parliament. In 10 or 20 years SA might be as democratic as Jordan is now – and without going through a revolution that might put the Wahhabi extremists in power.
As for women voting – that might come last but I’m sure it will come. Remember, we had what we considered democracy in this country from 1789, and we didn’t adopt the 19th Amendment until 1920.
Certainly this is proof of some sort of Democracy movement. Is it not?
I think I have heard that what the Sauds would like to go to is a sort of constitutional monarchy. Something similar to England’s model. Perhaps with more power, or at least not devolving into a total lack of power for a long time. But it seems like it may be an odd case of democratic changes being instututed from the top.
I agree with the rest of your post, BTW.
Based on what Paul has said, it sounds like they’re more concerned with keeping the rest of the world off their backs. Whether they’re having elections or not isn’t the most relevant thing. Who’s running? Is there anyone with an opinion the royals might not like? I sort of doubt it. A more accurate test of their goals with regard to voting would be to see what happens if a candidate they don’t like does well (not even winning, but getting a sign of support). Since we’re only dealing with stuff on the local, not national, level, saying there’s a democracy movement or that the Sauds are really giving up some power seems premature.
Or maybe Jordan’s model. Jordan has a two-house parliament – the Chamber of Deputies is elected, but the Senate is appointed by the king.
Right. but that’s ok so long as the things they do to keep us off their backs leads to more democracy or inclusiveness.
It is if they have never had them. I understand that in order to qualify for “full democracy”, whatever that is, exactly, requires fair and free elections. But elections are a start.
I agree entirely that these are valid and necessary questions.
I also agree that any assesment is premature. I am merely trying to figure out if there is any movement at all.
But wasn’t that England’s model not long ago?
It could be a start. On the other hand, Saddam Hussein held elections. The big question is the diversity of opinion the government allows. I’d really love to hear more detail about these elections- what are the positions, what are the issues, that kind of thing.
Not exactly – most members of the House of Lords were hereditary peers, plus a few bishops and judges. The sovereign could create new peers at any time, but most of them were hereditary – meaning, they were a power effectively independent of the crown. The House of Lords was stripped of most of its legislative powers around 1911, I believe, and since then the Commons has had the power to enact legislation on its own, the Lords having only a temporary delaying power. And then Tony Blair came around and sharply reduced the membership of the Lords.
In any case, in Britain the sovereign has not actually wielded effective political power since George III – while, at present, King Abdullah of Jordan does wield considerable political power. That’s probably the model the Sauds are looking to, if any.