Another Fragile election...another proof on a fragile legal structure

The first time it came to my attention was in the 2000 Bush-Gore elections. I thought to myself, this is democracy. The loser gracefully steps aside, despite strong conviction that he's not been the user... Of course little I knew, that 'structure' seem to only hold when people are indifferent toward politics enough. Second time, when I grew much more skeptic towards the 'structure' was much later in June 09 Iranian elections, and later the elections in Afghanistan....You vote, if there's a majority, the majority rules and the minority just steps aside and prepares to fight back in four years (in Iran's case 8 years.) The results must be always close enough, otherwise you are not reflecting all opinions. But if it's close enough, no one is actually ruling...and there fights, the minority is strong enough to stop all legislation, to hinder every action and to call on their base of support. Other times, disputes break out right after the elections endless negotiations with political parties and with power brokers (a.ka. Lawyers.) Disputes can take the form of maybe even on the streets protests on be half of one side against the other.

Just found a note, i wrote back in 2005. It's So abstract and without specifics...

http://thedeepvision.blogspot.com/2005/11/hypocrisy-of-democracy.html