home         poll         about         feedback
الصفحة الرئيسية     الاستطلاع     لمحة تاريخية      اتصل بنا

Sunday, February 19, 2006

Welcome to the syriapol blog - أهلاً و سهلاً في مدونة

Thank you for taking the survey. Please leave your feedback here - it is important for Syrians of ALL viewpoints to exchange their views on the future of Syria in a neutral forum.

I especially encourage arabic speakers to contribute their feedback in Arabic to the comments section. I would like this site to be as bi-lingual as possible.

شكراً للمشاركة! هل ترغب من فضلك بتسجيل إنطباعك؟ إنه من الهام لجميع السوريين، من كل الاتجاهات، أن يتبادلوا الآراء حول مستقبل سوريا في موقع محايد

أتمنى بشكل خاص من الناطقين باللغة العربية أن يرسلوا إنطباعاتهم باللغة العربية. إذ أنني أسعى لكي يصبح هذا الموقع ثنائي اللغة ما أمكن إلى ذلك سبيلاً! شكراً

15 comments:

Anonymous said...

Dear George:

Great work, separation of religion and state is essential for real Democracy, and that is hard to apply in a Muslim culture.

Anonymous said...

George,
Thank you for the opportunity.
I am delighted to be able to voice my opinion regarding Syria's future. However, some of the cards are a bit hypothetical, if not contradictory in their contents.. For example, you will never have free elections without uprooting the current regime, or conversely, free elections will, by default, lead to the uprooting of the current regime.
My 'Ideal' card would be: change through domestic protest, secular government, economic reforms leading to strong growth, free vote for all citizens and parties, and return to 4th June 1967 borders (although for a 'strongly preferable' option, I would accept return of some of the Golan Heights in exchange of peace)
Well, you asked for the 'Ideal'..
I would be very interested in the overall result.
Thanks again.

George Ajjan said...

Syrian Brit,

Thanks for replying. Remember, the elections attribute says, "administrative and parliamentary elections", not presidential. So it is conceivable that the regime could stay in place, but democracy could expand in a legislative capacity through the parliament.

Anonymous said...

I take your point. I just question the practicality of expecting the same regime with the prevailing mentality and insistance on all-encompassing dominance, to allow any form of free expression, never mind free legislative or administrative elections

Anonymous said...

You made me decide negatively on all the cards because in every card you included "attratcting foreign investment" as an issue...whereas I am STRONGLY against this sort of economic policy, which essentially subordinates the country's laws to private investment, especially foreign investment, and thus would involve the imposition of unfair labour laws, environmental laws, and would benefit a small sector of the population. What about those of us who envision economic development as involving very strong labour laws, mass participation in labour unions and syndicates, developing local industry and maintaining food self-sufficiency (rather than have an export-oriented economy which would produce food at low cost for foreigners, while the population plunges into starvation...just look at the results of "foreign investment" and neoliberal economic policies and the horrible affects they've had in Latin America)...you know there's a LARGE sector of Syrians who essentially wanna tell foreign investors to "go to hell", and indeed will be against private investment of any sort, preferring much more the democratization of capital in the country (not to say that they prefer a centrally-controlled state to have monopoly on capital, but would rather prefer something similar to the direction Venezuela is taking under president CHAVEZ, with democratic, popular organizations essentially wanting much more of a grassroots democracy with much more direct popular control over resources rather than private or state control). Many Syrians would probably tell you that the focus should be on domestic economic policies that WILL MOST DEFINITELY HURT "foreign investment" and not attract any of it. Therefore while i am interested in a secular democracy not imposed through foreign invasion but through popular struggle, I find myself not being able to rate any of the cards in a positive way due to the limitations you have imposed on economic policies. Everytime I read the words "improve economy through foreign investment", I got an immediate allergy and negative reaction, because these policies just don't work! Other than that i'm really interested in this project because I'm very interested in public opinion in Syria, given that we've never had any precise picture of it, just feelers here and there. That's my 2 cents!
Thanks

George Ajjan said...

On the poll, the economic attribute has 2 choices:

Economic reforms, encouragement of foreign investment, & reduced corruption will lead to higher wages & strong economic growth
or
Slow progress of economic reforms & inability to attract foreign investment or tackle corruption will keep wages flat & prohibit economic growth

These statements propose an end, and the means to get there. The end is, basically, good economy or bad economy. The means are 3-fold: economic reforms, corruption, & foreign investment.

Therefore, syriapol asks the participant to accept that encouragement of foreign investment will be one of 3 factors that leads to economic growth, or that inability to attract foreign investment is one of 3 factors which prohibit economic growth.

Ultimately, the poll user is evaluating the end outcome.

Therefore, I plan to leave the economic issue alone, as it is currently phrased.

Anonymous said...

Hi Goerge,

I followed the discussion on DFI on Syriacomment.

I reiterate my comment there. If you want to measure the ends you should drop the means from the question ;)

Nafdik

Anonymous said...

Your question is like a mother telling her son:

Do you want to eat your spinach or do you want to stay short all your life?

Nafdik

Anonymous said...

Hehe, I knew this must be a classified fallacy.

A quick search on Wikepedia shows:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_dilemma

The logical fallacy of false dilemma (in some sources falsified dilemma), which is also known as fallacy of the excluded middle, black and white thinking, false dichotomy, false correlative, either/or dilemma or bifurcation, involves a situation in which two alternative points of view - often, though not always, the two extreme points on some spectrum - are held to be the only options, when in reality there exist one or more alternate options which have not been considered.

Nafdik

George Ajjan said...

Nafdik,

Certainly there are more than 2 extreme possibilities for Syria's economic status. However, for the purposes of this poll, it is important to evalutate the overall importance of economic growth in relation to political change, government structure, democratic reform, and the peace process.

In the future, we can always do additional polling to gain more specific insight into Syrian attitudes on particular economic systems or methods.

Anonymous said...

Without stretching this discussion any longer than it deserves.

My point was not that you represent 2 extreme states of the economy, rather that you intermingle:

a) A political beleif: Liberal Economy => Good Economy

with

b) An economic outcome: low employment, higher standard of living, etc

By doing so the measurement becomes confused are we measuring poeple who share the political beleif or the poeple who share the desire for economic progress.

Of course the fewer questions you have the less variables you want to measure, hence my recommendation for purifying the question to reflect more your intended outcome, namely the importance of economic growth.

An example would be:

A sound economic policy will lead to higher wages, lower unemployment & strong economic growth
or
The economy remains a lower priority for the government keeping wages flat & prohibiting economic growth

This is my last comment on the issue as I think I expressed the point.

I congratulate again on the poll, great job.

Nafdik

Anonymous said...

Dear George,

I have choose negative answers for all cards. I really regreat to announce you that all point of view about propositions are directed, I mean its inspired by a West American way of live even if the idea of a poll is great.
As European native with arab origin, i reconize the American shadow behind this Libera Economy=Best Economy for Syria, there is no other way for this fantastic country and population... for them not for the future West Hedge funds dividendes and benefits???
As a humanist peaceful person, of course I want and need peace for everybody,my kids and for me BUT as a "Neutral" pseudo scientist, why only two purposes about peace with Israel? In which condition? For which result? Maybe people don't want peace with Israel, so you have to give this choice as well, no???
I hope to not show myself with arrogance through this sentences but its better to not show a "Neutral" position because its not possible to have it.
Perhaps we have to discuss about the definition of "Neutral" for sure all Arabs, Syrians who i know in Europe doesn't agree with the "Neutral" position of Condy,Blair,Chirac and Sharon...

George Ajjan said...

Dear nousvousils,

Certainly there are more possiblities than the 2 or 3 statements for each of the 5 issues. This poll presents what I determined to be the most likely possiblities, and asks Syrians to evaluate those. I considered at length the possiblity of "no peace with Israel" but ultimately I concluded that that is not a realistic scenario.

If the results show that a large number of respondents give negative marks to all the cards, then we will know that we should expand the options.

Thank you for your feedback.

Anonymous said...

Dear George,
you answer me with telling me that you present the poll in what you determined to be the most likely possibilities, an ask syrians to evaluate those.. Ok, don't you think more choice you present, more possibilities you offer to the syrians? Thats exactly what I wanted to let you know.
I think syrian from inside or outside are thirsty of choice, I am you know why...
From scientic point of view the begining of the issues has to offer a maximum of satements which will be much better to determine after the choices?
So, please George, incluse as well different statement of investments, you know what I mean (refearing to my last post).
Thank you for considering this.

Anonymous said...

تحياتي شاركت في الإستطلاع و حاولت أن أكون صادقاً مبادره جميله و أتمنىلكم التوفيق