it's parliamentary election time in iran. because the hard-liners vetoed most of the pro-reform candidates (including several incumbent members of parliament) and refused to back down, the reformers have called for a boycott of the election. i don't know how many people will honor the boycott, but the result is pretty much a foregone conclusion; the hard-liners will regain control of the iranian parliament.
so here's the question: do election boycotts ever work? every once in a while i read about someone boycotting an election somewhere and then, quite predicably, the boycotting party loses. so why do people keep boycotting? i understand the general philosophy behind boycotts, if the whole proceeding is a sham, then you should not give it any sort of legitimacy by participating in it. but then as a practical matter, when one group boycotts an election, they always entirely end up shut out from power. so what exactly does the boycott accomplish? our own current president shows that a flawed election does not necessarily hamper your ability to act once you are in office. so what is the point? can anyone think of an example where an electoral boycott led to something favorable for the people doing the boycott?
