If there was an annual contest for the best photograph in Jordanian journalism, it would have certainly been awarded to the photograph published in Al Doustor newspaper on Monday which shows a number of candidates rushing and competing to get the candidacy number 1 for Irbid. It is a photograph which embodies the real image of the ‘democratic Jordanian elections’ wedding’ of the year 2008. It is of an individual race to earn the best tool for public display in election campaigns. The smartest candidate is the one who started working on Saturday night and occupied all the traffic lights, electricity poles, bridges, tunnels and even trees on main streets – before even getting the approval to take part in the elections. The fastest is the one who queued from the night to wait for the doors to open and get number 1, just like the small digit number plates which give their owners a social aura and status, worth staying up nights, working hard and spending money.

I have previously written about the phenomena of ‘political money’ in elections as have some other colleagues but I would like to apologise for a mistake that I committed. What we see now while we are at the beginning of the elections campaign isn't political money but merely money being spent excessively and which moves a large number of sectors of the Jordanian economy, especially the advertising and design companies and the food industry, which have nothing to do with politics. It is money not related to political ideologies or programmes but is linked to individuals ambitious to win Parliamentary seats and all the profit it will bring with it. A very few are running for political purposes.

Fine, perhaps the problem has to do with me personally as I don't want to be unjust to the candidates or society. I come from a generation whose political awareness began at university, during the period of political openness in the late 90s. We participated actively in the elections of 1989; we believed in democracy in 1993; our hopes were first dashed in 1997 and we witnessed a retreat in the quality of political work in 2003. However, it is only now in 2007 that I feel that I don't belong to this world we face on the streets and newspapers – of names and campaigning slogans.

In the world I belong to, made up of my family, professional work, media, culture, civil, academic and educational institutions, I didn't see the majority of faces which have filled the streets yesterday morning. I don't know anything about the world of business, real estate, contracting and constructions, restaurants and other economic activities and for this reason, I wasn't able to distinguish between the candidates whom we see on every junction, tree, light post and billboard. I was able to recognise former MPs (Members of Parliament) who do not want to give up their chairs despite the fact that they have not achieved anything. I was also able to recognise the sons of officials and former MPs who want to maintain their hereditary parliamentary seats. I also saw tribal leaders whom I respect a lot but whose place isn't in Parliament. I looked in vain for a political nominee, a political intellectual, economic expert, renowned lawyer, university professor or an activist in human rights or democracy until my patience and the fuel in my car ran out.

I don't know who to vote for in my constituency and I don't think I will be able to make a hasty decision. Perhaps, I may stay at home and make myself absent from practicing my democratic right to vote. I feel as if I am a stranger to all what is happening and that all the knowledge that I have amassed about this country is not being represented in the elections. As I declare that I am able to distinguish many of the people who are able to contribute positively towards the development of Jordan, I feel depressed that we are moving towards a unique parliament, composed of money but not competence.

Some might tell me: It's about time you woke up and welcome to the new Jordan. Nobody cares about public service or culture, intellectualism, political programmes and a coherent productive economy and that all that we are moving towards is a transitional period towards the supremacy of money and the market on all decisions. It is money which gives candidates merits and convinces the electorate to vote for whoever has the more money and is able to bestow them with his gifts. This is the season of exchange of interests as votes will be in exchange for money interests and all those candidates whose pictures we see today and who are warming up to us will not be seen after the elections when we will only hear about them through the media. It is an opportunity we will have to invest in.

Have we reached a situation where money is the controlling factor? We have spent a long time discussing the electoral law and the injustice of having a system with one voice and the dismantling of the political process. We also discussed with a lot of reservations the unjust manner in which votes are distributed among cities and governorates. But even in cities, sovereignty is for money just as allegiances is towards the tribes in governorates. Where is the political awareness we were imagining was found in the cities?

However, is there a means of getting out of this reality? What is the possibility of there being a ‘critical mass’ in society which is able to rebel against money and its lure and over allegiance to families and contribute to change? At present, I feel depressed but it is illogical to blame the government only for drafting an elections law which gives the opportunity for those with money and influence only. It is up to the constituents themselves to cast their votes without pressure from the government (except in special cases!) This means that if those with money and influence win, the blame shouldn't fall on the government but on the constituents.

In Maslow‘s pyramid of human needs, the base is made up of basic needs for survival, especially the economic ones, and ends with intellectual, cultural and political needs and values. In society, the same formula is applicable. After 18 years of democratic reform, the immediate economic needs of society gives preference to candidates with money and family influence and squashes changes of political candidates, except the Islamists, who are supported by religious sentiments.