Dear Sir,

I am sure that people are watching the United States presidential nomination primaries.

Aside from the Donald Trump spectacle and the narrowing gap between Bernie Sanders and Hillary Clinton, there are principles at play that are worthy of our attention. Note anyone above the age of 18 participating in the selection process of who should represent the parties.

They are not card-carrying party members; the only card they need to carry is a voter ID.

Sanders is an independent who chose to run under a democratic party ticket because, in his words, it was easier. Two major democratic principles:

1, Everyone of voting age has the right of first choice in who runs for whatever party

2, Everyone has the right to stand for whichever party they choose

Those are basic human rights, not to be denied by a political party or party construct. Bernie nor Trump are party choices, yet they are contenders because of the voter.

Contrast that with our system where parties have a six or eight-person selection committee doing the primary selection, followed by a small-branch contest with 20 persons at a time.

We have an elite system of privilege voters who do the main selection, followed by the populace who get to vote on those already decided by the political party elite.

Further, no one can decide on their own or by the force of their constituents to run under any party banner. Such right is the preserve of the party.

Until we understand these basic human rights, which underline the basis of a true democracy, we will never see the light of day and will live under a tyranny of party rule. If there is to be a genuine political movement, it should be to empower the voters of this country so they participate in the first choice of who represents them.

They should also have the right to stand. It’s OK to make stands against injustice or wrongs, but what about making stands for something? What can be more noble than standing for your basic human and political rights?

I have tried for decades to bring these principles to public attention, as I recognise the parties have no interest in giving that power to the voters.

Preceding the 2012 General Election in a televised debate, including Jamahl Simmons and Walton Brown, I talked about open primaries and Brown questioned me for an example. I gave the US and he argued they had no such participation.

Fortunately, the media and time are giving us a glaring example. I can only hope we learn from it and that groups such as the People’s Campaign or Immigration Reform Action Group can adopt these principles and put some substance in their stance.

It will weaken the power of Alaska Hall and Reid Street, but will make stronger organisations when more people are engaged.

KHALID WASI