Hassan Shariati-Madari: The Hypothesis of Choosing Between Bad and Worse Has Become Cliché

As we approach the presidential election date, the debate over whether to boycott or participate in the elections intensifies. Proponents of participation list their reasons for voting, while supporters of the boycott discuss their reasons for abstaining. Radio Farda has attempted to ask various political figures for their reasons for voting or not voting and to find responses to criticisms directed at both views. It is clarified that Radio Farda does not support any specific group or party in the upcoming elections and does not advocate for either boycott or participation. Most supporters of the boycott argue that the Guardian Council prevents free elections in Iran through its oversight and since their preferred candidates are not among those approved, they choose not to participate. In contrast, most supporters of participation claim they vote to maintain the current situation and prevent a regression to the past. Hassan Shariati-Madari, a political activist and analyst, and a critic of the Islamic Republic residing in Hamburg, Germany, advocates for free elections and believes that the current electoral process in the Islamic Republic is not free. He argues that people should not participate in the upcoming presidential election. Shariati-Madari states that he has defended free elections as a strategy for transitioning from authoritarian regimes to democracy. However, he notes that since 2005, the system has added engineered elections and vote manipulation, making elections increasingly ceremonial and diminishing the impact of people's votes. He argues that the method of choosing between bad and worse and presenting a terrifying face to encourage greater participation has become clichéd. The only weapon left for the people is their non-participation. He believes that by participating, people may inadvertently support candidates aligned with the regime, leading to further deterioration of the country. Shariati-Madari asserts that the only way for the people to resist is through non-participation, which may force the regime to concede. He discusses the impossibility of free elections in Iran under the current system and the historical context of electoral manipulation. He emphasizes that the current electoral system is in crisis and exacerbates societal conflicts. He believes that the only way out of the current situation is for the rulers to recognize the crisis and open up the social, political, and economic systems. He concludes that the historical experience shows that when the balance of power shifts and the people become aware, every regime moves towards reform. He expresses skepticism about the reformability of the Islamic Republic, suggesting that the historical context will determine the outcome of any potential reforms.