Just two days before the elections, the Iranian Shiite mullahs, hardline clerics who control much of the government, forcibly closed two reformists (and by no coincidence also very popular) newspapers, Yass-e-No and Shargh. In addition, the clerics also sealed off the campaign office of the main reformist party and shutdown its website. The reason for the closure was based on the publication of a scathing open letter to supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei by dozens of reformist lawmakers, the Lebanese Daily Star reported.

The story tragically gets worse: one month ago the government "disqualified" more than 2.500 reformist candidates, and in protest to that move, another 1,179 reform candidates willfully dropped out of the race.

Reformists have since urged a boycott of the election (which, according to released figures is precisely what happened), claiming that taking part in such a huge farce will only add insult to injury. This policy of non-involvement has been previously implemented with disastrous consequences. The New York Times reports that in last year's city council municipal elections, a paltry 12 percent of Tehran's eligible voters actually turned out. After the clerics gained control of the council, they quickly suspended programs deemed "un-Islamic."

Westerners watching these developments unfold cannot help but question why reformists are acquiescing to the mullahs' demands. Indeed, such questions are fair. It seems counterintuitive that people thirsting for freedom and basic rights would shy away from the political process. But Iranians know the mullahs will never truly allow any substantive democratic reformations. Thus, the ordinary Persian is now using other means to spread the democratic message.

According to the Associated Press (AP):

Dozens of Farsi-language websites have sprung up catering to Iranian web surfers hungry for news and views that go beyond the austere, official line of the Islamic Republic...and while the ruling clerics look certain to tighten their hold on the political establishment in Friday's parliamentary election, they are fighting a losing battle to keep dissident websites in check.

They also report between 20 and 30 major political websites are active in Iran, most of them being pro-reformist. There are also roughly 20,000 Iranian blog sites and "between 50 and 60 have become widely read for their overtly political content." Ali Shemrani, a correspondent for the weekly magazine Ass-e-Ertebat, told AP that much to the chagrin of the government, these types of politically oriented sites are growing. Shemrani also contends that after first using emails and chat rooms to express opinions, citizens are now seeking multiple avenues.

Official estimates put the number of Internet users in Iran ranging anywhere from 2.5 million to 4 million, nearly double that mark four years ago. More importantly, two-thirds of Iran's population of 66 million are below the age of 30, and in addition to being politically active, they are also computer literate.

Popular sites in Iran include Gooya, a directory of links that includes news and various forms of information, and chatter.com, "a portal with links to Persian-language news sites, chat rooms, music and shopping pages," reports the BBC. The Iranian Students News Agency, created four years ago as an alternative to state-run news, has also garnered a large following.

Even more interesting is the development of sites operating outside of Iran. Sites like Daneshjoo have become popular and particularly, Emrooz (meaning "Today") has been continually dodging an Iranian government crackdown.

There are two extremely important observations here: Iran has a "black market civil society" and the effects of globalization have afforded Iranians with new democratic opportunities.

On the first count, civil society does have a universally agreed upon definition, but it is generally regarded as the active social organizations, groups, clubs, networks and various other associations that function independent of the state for the purpose of promoting their collective (and like-minded) interests. Civil societies serve as the foundational bedrock for healthy democracies. In Iran, much of what would ordinarily constitute a civil society is absent. The Iranian government either forbids or greatly restricts its citizens from forming many of these alliances, for fear that a working civil society would substantially undermine their power.

But merely outlawing something will not make it disappear. The protection and nurturing of basic human rights and democratic fundamentals are of the utmost importance to the people of Iran. If forbidden by law, the people will simply circumvent it. These Internet chat rooms, libraries, blog sites, link directories, and news gathering organizations are an integral part of the civil society today in Iran, albeit the surrogate element. Since most legal avenues of civil society are not viable options, the people of Iran have sought out other forms. Admittedly, the associations on the Internet are more nebulously constructed and ephemeral. However, they still fulfill the basic human and democratic need to express one's self and do so in the company of others.

On the second count, one can clearly see the positive effects of globalization. Iranians (in addition to many other peoples across the world) have access to an unbelievable amount of information and various methods of expression, all on one medium (although the Internet has not been the only method. The New York Times reports that text messaging on cell phones has been a key method of reformists to transmit information and spread important messages).

Critics of globalization complain that only 5 percent of the world's population have access to the Internet, and most of that 5 percent is in Western countries. That contention may be true, but it misses a very important historical perspective. The Internet is only about 3,500 days old and has presently reached (at least on one or more occasion) roughly 10 percent of the world's population. The telephone, on the other hand, has existed almost 125 years, but up until a few years ago only made its way to half the world's people. The Internet's diffusion is literally the fastest spread of technology in recorded human history.

It is technological growth and development from globalization that is allowing the people of Iran to vent their frustrations, claim both common and dissenting views, communicate with one another and participate in an integral part of any democracy: free speech.

Economist Joesph Stiglitz of Columbia University has referred to the spread of globalization as the infiltration of "market fundamentalism" and views its "failings" in eradicating poverty as a devastatingly delimiting quality. But whatever Prof. Stiglitz may feel inadequate about globalization's market forces to bring economic growth and prosperity to the world's huddled masses, surely he can have no quarrel with its fostering of technological growth and the related spread of information and ideas.

In 2000, the reformists won a majority in the parliament for the first time, securing 189 seats. This time, however, Iran's hardline candidates recaptured parliament, winning at least 149 seats (146 are needed for a clear majority) in the 290-seat parliament, according to CNN. All 290 seats were up for grabs, and though a second round of elections will decide who has 58 still unclaimed seats, reformists have only won a meager 40.

Iran's parliament, or Majlis, is elected every four years in direct elections. The parliament has the power to introduce laws, pass bills and summon or impeach some members of government, including the president. All bills passed by the Majlis, however, must be approved by the conservative Guardian Council.

Predictably, voter turnout was at extreme lows: Iran's Interior Ministry reported that 50 percent of eligible voters cast ballots as compared to 2000 where 67 percent voted In Tehran, a paltry 30 percent of the population came out to vote (Iran scholar Michael Ledeen of the American Enterprise Institute estimates that figure to be wildly exaggerated) and IranMania.com reports that in Isfahan, 32 percent of the electorate showed up versus roughly 47 percent in 2000.

Thus, the clerical regimes push to counteract the reforms has succeeded, surprising no one. But their concerted suffocation of real democracy cannot last. Iranians are demonstrating that one way or the other, they will participate in democracy, even if for now it is only on the black market.