What "meaningful dialogue" should the opposition have taken part in exactly... for some reason you guys still believe that the opposition are on equal footing with the ruling party when if the ruling party wants a law to go through it will, and the oppositions support is simply a "bonus" or "unneeded". This is why the opposition doesn't "oppose" it has literally no power to do so
Opposition parties such as the Democrats in the USA and Labour in the UK are also relatively powerless, yet they continue to take their seats in their respective government, respect election outcomes, and, most crucially, win back their ability to be their country’s governing party. What’s more, opposition parties have gone from opposition to governing back to opposition and so on...in countries such as the USA, France, the UK, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands, yet Georgia has never had an opposition party be re-elected to a governing party in Georgia’s nearly 30 years of post-Soviet independence. Georgia’s opposition chooses to be weak by boycotting every law it perceives as being unfair, boycotting every election which it seems illegitimate, and then take to the streets to protest until either the protests fizzle out or a consensus is reached. This is a fundamental flaw in Georgia’s democratic process-that only governing parties can create change and opposition parties are completely powerless and therefore should not participate in government/politics at all. What’s more, the opposition had the ability to turn justifiable and legitimate anger at the Georgian Dream into votes during the second round of elections. Instead, Georgia’s opposition forfeited the election over a small discrepancy in what we now know was a faulty PVT result, thereby giving the Georgia Dream a unanimous victory. When the opposition claims to be powerless, remember, Georgia’s opposition collectively won around 52% of the vote, yet they chose to sit in silence, forfeited the second round of elections, and thereby failed represent their constituents in parliament.
@@visiting-georgia4650 there is one thing you're fundamentally wrong about. The opposition was gonna lose the second round weather they participated or not. You gave a lot of examples of countries where despite losing the opposition stays but difference between those countries and Georgia is that they're actual democracies where the votes aren't tampered with. The Georgian dream was not gonna give up a majority in these elections, even if they lost fair and square.
@@fabulouscat3911 It should be noted that there is a strong divergence between the opinions of international observers, such as EU and American observers, and local (Georgian) election observers. The OSCE/ODIHR states that "The 31 October parliamentary elections were competitive and, overall, fundamental freedoms were respected. Nevertheless, pervasive allegations of pressure on voters and blurring of the line between the ruling party and the state reduced public confidence in some aspects of the process," with a similar sentiment coming from the American Embassy to Georgia. As such, most foreign observers consider the elections to be free and fair, but with considerable flaws. In the meanwhile, a joint assessment from 26 Georgian NGOs states "In summary, we would like to note that the 2020 parliamentary elections were marked by a low degree of democracy, which would be detrimental to the stable development of our country and its international reputation." As such, Georgian NGOs as well do not directly state that the election’s results are invalid/falsified, but they do not go as far as Western observers to say that the elections were “free and fair.”
@@visiting-georgia4650 they were "free and fair" to the point where you can go and vote, nobody's really gonna stop you. But when you vote, the actual count of the ballots are completely under the governments control, no observer can watch or judge that...
What "meaningful dialogue" should the opposition have taken part in exactly... for some reason you guys still believe that the opposition are on equal footing with the ruling party when if the ruling party wants a law to go through it will, and the oppositions support is simply a "bonus" or "unneeded". This is why the opposition doesn't "oppose" it has literally no power to do so
Opposition parties such as the Democrats in the USA and Labour in the UK are also relatively powerless, yet they continue to take their seats in their respective government, respect election outcomes, and, most crucially, win back their ability to be their country’s governing party. What’s more, opposition parties have gone from opposition to governing back to opposition and so on...in countries such as the USA, France, the UK, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and the Netherlands, yet Georgia has never had an opposition party be re-elected to a governing party in Georgia’s nearly 30 years of post-Soviet independence.
Georgia’s opposition chooses to be weak by boycotting every law it perceives as being unfair, boycotting every election which it seems illegitimate, and then take to the streets to protest until either the protests fizzle out or a consensus is reached.
This is a fundamental flaw in Georgia’s democratic process-that only governing parties can create change and opposition parties are completely powerless and therefore should not participate in government/politics at all.
What’s more, the opposition had the ability to turn justifiable and legitimate anger at the Georgian Dream into votes during the second round of elections. Instead, Georgia’s opposition forfeited the election over a small discrepancy in what we now know was a faulty PVT result, thereby giving the Georgia Dream a unanimous victory.
When the opposition claims to be powerless, remember, Georgia’s opposition collectively won around 52% of the vote, yet they chose to sit in silence, forfeited the second round of elections, and thereby failed represent their constituents in parliament.
@@visiting-georgia4650 there is one thing you're fundamentally wrong about. The opposition was gonna lose the second round weather they participated or not. You gave a lot of examples of countries where despite losing the opposition stays but difference between those countries and Georgia is that they're actual democracies where the votes aren't tampered with. The Georgian dream was not gonna give up a majority in these elections, even if they lost fair and square.
@@fabulouscat3911
It should be noted that there is a strong divergence between the opinions of international observers, such as EU and American observers, and local (Georgian) election observers. The OSCE/ODIHR states that "The 31 October parliamentary elections were competitive and, overall, fundamental freedoms were respected. Nevertheless, pervasive allegations of pressure on voters and blurring of the line between the ruling party and the state reduced public confidence in some aspects of the process," with a similar sentiment coming from the American Embassy to Georgia. As such, most foreign observers consider the elections to be free and fair, but with considerable flaws.
In the meanwhile, a joint assessment from 26 Georgian NGOs states "In summary, we would like to note that the 2020 parliamentary elections were marked by a low degree of democracy, which would be detrimental to the stable development of our country and its international reputation." As such, Georgian NGOs as well do not directly state that the election’s results are invalid/falsified, but they do not go as far as Western observers to say that the elections were “free and fair.”
@@visiting-georgia4650 they were "free and fair" to the point where you can go and vote, nobody's really gonna stop you. But when you vote, the actual count of the ballots are completely under the governments control, no observer can watch or judge that...
@@fabulouscat3911 ოპოზოციონერბნა ნაციონალების რა იქნა 2008 წელს ყველამ იცის