Exporting Democracy: An Oxymoron? genre: Just Jihad & Polispeak & Six Degrees of Speculation
We hear a lot from the Bush administration about Democracy. President Bush has often said that “Democracy is on the march". When talking about the spread of democracy, he often goes on to say that freedom is sought by all humans and that all people deserve the benefits of freedom. In general terms, I agree with the President about the latter. However, with regards to the former, I am increasingly skeptical.
Since the initiation of the war in Iraq, the objective of the invasion has largely shifted from the belief that Sadaam Hussein possessed weapons of mass destruction to the loftier goal of exporting democracy to the country’s oppressed population. Again, I agree with that the newly offered objective is a worthy goal when viewed as a general principle.
How one achieves this goal of exporting democracy is the issue. Democracy’s origin has its roots in passion. It is a groundswell, not a trickle down proposition. The core principle of democracy starts with a focus on a belief in the value of all humanity. Within its structure, it sets aside any preferences for particular religious beliefs; leaving such choices to be determined as a matter of personal choice. Essentially, the right of the individual takes precedent over any one belief system so long as each individual has an equal opportunity to have the beliefs they choose…without violating the rights of others.
America’s founding experience with democracy is an example of this process. Given these basic parameters, it doesn’t bode well for Iraq. Religious ideology is driving the mechanics of their trek towards democracy and rather than set these varied beliefs aside, many want to lead with ideology as the guiding template for their government. In the end, democracy grows out of tolerance and compromise. It is neither rigid nor theocratic. Iraq appears to be both.
Looking beyond Iraq, there is growing evidence of an increasing degree of fanatical and intransigent theocratic ideology. That is not to say that some governments haven’t attempted to adopt some democratic principles…Egypt comes to mind. However, despite some of the visible efforts, the underlying belief systems remain fully engrained and entrenched in the society. In other words the groundswell needed for democracy to thrive hasn’t fully emerged and the trickle down approach is less than effective.
Other examples of this trending towards extremism in the midst of what is presumed to be the emergence of democracy include the recent victory by Hamas in the Palestinian elections and the election of Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as the Iranian President together with the expanding influence of the countries religious institutions. In addition to these situations, we see the emergence of hostility to the United States in South America as evidenced by the antagonizing activities of Hugo Chavez in Venezuela and the victory of Evo Morales in Bolivia, who opposes much of the American policy agenda.
From the New York Times, according to Jim Schultz of the policy analysis Democracy Center in Bolivia, “The left is contesting in a very practical way for political power. There’s a common thread that runs through Lula (Brazil) and Kirchner (Argentina) and Chavez (Venezuela) and Evo (Bolivia), and the left in Chile to a certain degree, and that thread is a popular challenge to the market fundamentalism of the Washington consensus."
While these South American countries are democratic in nature, they are rapidly distinguishing their vision of democracy from that of the United States. This is in addition to the growing Muslim influence and populations, both of which are not positive trending indicators for expanding American democracy. The risk is that the United States becomes increasingly isolated such that American democracy becomes the object of opposition despite its inherent value. Given the instability of many of these countries, the United States could find itself unable to insure the continuation of these democratic governments should they be in jeopardy.
Much of this shifting reality is in stark contrast to the picture being drawn by the Bush administration. In the revisionist effort to justify the invasion of Iraq on the basis of exporting democracy to insure freedom, we may be actually undermining the appeal of democracy. In many ways it is understandable given the visible contradictions. Though this may ultimately be an inaccurate evaluation, at some point perception becomes reality despite ones best efforts and intentions. The vast capital and good will available to the United States after 9/11 has seemingly evaporated. Instead of being perceived as a victim, we are unwittingly being transformed into the villain.
Daniel DiRito | May 1, 2006 | 5:16 AM
Comments
1 On May 1, 2006 at 2:00 PM, tctatc wrote —
Could it be that the problem is the definition of the word, democracy? What does that word mean? The average person has some vague idea but is as far off as can be. I'm not going to try to define it but simnply advocate an official definition be done and taught, whatever it turns out to be to every youngster as a mandatory part of elementary education. Newcomers, recent immigrants should also be required to learn it or leave.
Here's a couple of what I have heard that I know are either outright wrong or totally incomplete. Democracy is free elections. Democracy is freedom of religion. Democracy is majority rule. If not these things then what is it?
Democracy to me is the constitution. It is a straight jacket for all appointed and elected government officials. It says absolutely no to majority rule yet leaves open vast majority rule as a means of changing it. The notion that I can vote unconstitutional things, anti gay laws for example of one the moral majority would support, and get them put into place is not democratic. Yet it has all the elements. Free elections to elect officials of like mind with the majority that will enact laws from outside the constitution and appoint judges that will allow them to stand. That's not democracy but it is what many moralists think it is.
Trackback Pings
© Copyright 2024
Post a comment