There’s an “election” in Afghanistan today, but it seems even the New York Times admits it’s basically a sham. For the zealots of nation-building who preach spreading democracy through the barrels of NATO’s guns, it’s pretty much game over. Take a look at the grim picture painted in this article, “Afghan Votes Come Cheap, and Often in Bulk”:

How much does it cost to buy an Afghan vote?

Saturday’s parliamentary elections offer a unique opportunity to ascertain that price — and it is in theory a market with many buyers, as 2,500 candidates scramble for only 249 seats. Afghanistan may be a feudal society in many ways, but it is very much capitalist feudalism (as the Soviets found out to their regret).

Nonetheless, prices are low. In northern Kunduz Province, Afghan votes cost $15 each; in eastern Ghazni Province, a vote can be bought for $18. In Kandahar, they sell their rights for as little as $1 a ballot. More commonly, the price seems to hover in the $5 to $6 range, as quoted to New York Times reporters in places like Helmand and Khost Provinces.

Even by the standards of a country rated as one of the poorest in the world, Afghans seem to be selling their votes cheap, and it is not so surprising why…

Vote buying is much more common in this election than the last national balloting here last year. The feeling, experts say, was that last year’s election was stolen wholesale by supporters of President Hamid Karzai, so there was little need for vote buying.

There may also have been less outright vote buying because it was most likely that Mr. Karzai would have won even without election fraud, as the incumbent and a member of the Pashtun ethnic group, the country’s largest.

This time, many well-heeled Afghan independent candidates are looking to buy their way into the lucrative sinecure of a seat in Parliament. That not only comes with a healthy salary — about $2,200 a month gross — but tremendous opportunities for graft.

And this time, a combination of voter apathy and disenchantment, far greater insecurity and a fairly small number of votes needed to win any individual seat have combined to, as an economist would put it, create a market. In many places, as few as 2,500 votes are enough to clinch the election.

Now that’s inspiring stuff. The cynical, brutal reality of ‘feudal capitalist democracy’ explains why many Afghans have given up any hope they may have once harboured about the foreign military occupation and the political institutions it installed.

You might be wondering about dissident Afghan activist Malalai Joya, who was elected to Parliament five years ago only to be unjustly suspended in May 2007. This time around, she has chosen to sit out the whole process. Among the reasons for her decision: her own experience of threats, silencing and ultimately expulsion from Parliament; the blatant fraud of Karzai’s 2009 presidential “re-election”; and the unchecked fraud and graft of the political class as a whole.

Expect dismally low participation in today’s vote. Afghans will vote with their feet by staying home. And, increasingly, by joining anti-occupation protests.

Derrick O'Keefe

Derrick O'Keefe

Derrick O'Keefe is a writer in Vancouver, B.C. He served as rabble.ca's editor from 2012 to 2013 and from 2008 to 2009.