How is it "democratic" to pull out of the elections, and call on supporters to hit the streets? If every potentially loosing candidate is entitled to this "solution", this is a formula for anarchy. After all, isn't the whole idea behind democracy that we all --- including the loosing candiates --- accept the results of elections and move on. Lately, this has become a new fashion. From Modova and Iran, to now Kyrgizstan, loosing cadidates deny the majority to form the government through denying it legitimacy. If you add to this the inevitable protests, as well as the free-lancing thugs, arsonists, looters and other opportunistic thiefs, the new formula for anarchy reminds me of any other old anarchy. But the new twist to the 21st century game is the tumultuous support for democracy-undermining anarchy coming from the West!!! The anarchists are the new heros, they cannot do anything wrong, they are the "reformers", the "oppressed", the romantic new Byrons of our era. It does not take much to see the all present hand of NED in all this. The "branding" of the anarchy, the nifty expensive technology that is the nervous system of the planned chaos, the nifty English-language posters, the handbands, coloured fingers, other fashion items. So neat, so coreographed. But what makes me wonder is the appeal of all of this to the average person in the West. It seems almost like a secret desire to do the same, to defy the inevitability of elections where the more politicians promise "change", the less changes, while at the same time, they can hardly breathe from all the regulations controlling even the tiniest part of their everyday life. The everage guy does not see the stage management, the funding stream and the political machinations behind the scenes that manipulate the crowds. All they see is the defiance, denial of legitimacy. There is a whif of envy in the Joe the Ordinary!