The world needs stabil countries, not "democracy"

[Bleipriester]

We all love freedom and wealth. Almost everybody does, but the accomplishable amount of freedom depends on the political situation. The Arab Spring shows, that you cannot "bring democracy" to extremists. Tunesia, Egypt, etc: let them vote and you´ll get a Islamist extremist government, that deprives 50 % of the population, the women, of their rights.
Chaos and violence govern in former peaceful regions. Escapees storm our already stressed Europe and Islamist terrorism establishes around it.

As a result, democracy is not a proper solution for most of these countries.

 

[eagle1462010]

Egypt is putting a boot on the neck of the Muslim Brotherhood as we speak.

Some people simply need a boot on their neck for their own good.

Our policy in the Arab Spring has been a failure. We supported a single Tyrant for a group of Tyrants and now the region is in Flames.

 

[editec]

Democracy...what a wonderful imaginary form of government.

 

[Decus]

I also think that countries "need" enemies. Global stability is sometimes less important than being able to turn your citizens attention towards an outside threat (real or perceived), rather than to allow them to focus on the internal issues at hand. It has proven to be an effective tool for governance throughout history and is still in use by most countries today.

 

[Katzndogz]

Not every country is capable of democracy. Democracy is a tool, it's function is to distribute power. It is the means to an end, not the end itself.

Here is an excellent explanation of democracy.

The one fundamental virtue of democracy is that it is the widest possible means of distributing power within a system. And that leads to a system that is only as good and bad as the sum of its voters. It is possible to have a democracy of cannibals, so long as the majority agrees that’s the way to go. Or a democracy in which a quarter of the population has no legal or civil rights whatsoever. So long as that is the expressed will of the majority.



Democracy is a tool. It is a means, not the end. During the Bush Administration, democracy was treated as an end. The embedded assumption was that the average Arab-Muslim wanted the same things we did. A condensed version of the American Dream with jobs and freedom for everyone. And when given a chance at a voting booth, tyranny and terrorism would blow away like smoke, as a liberated electorate would choose leaders who would give them these things

Democracy of Cannibals

The culture of the middle east does not lend itself to democratic processes. The culture is tribal. There is little sense of nationalism. Loyalty is to the tribe and whose tribe will be ascendant.

 

[Sunni Man]

[ame=http://youtu.be/4VHKpGJX29s?t=44s]Full Metal Jacket Peace - YouTube[/ame]

 

[pacer]

We all love freedom and wealth. Almost everybody does, but the accomplishable amount of freedom depends on the political situation. The Arab Spring shows, that you cannot "bring democracy" to extremists. Tunesia, Egypt, etc: let them vote and you´ll get a Islamist extremist government, that deprives 50 % of the population, the women, of their rights.
Chaos and violence govern in former peaceful regions. Escapees storm our already stressed Europe and Islamist terrorism establishes around it.

As a result, democracy is not a proper solution for most of these countries.

I agree. I came across this article which addresses the subject quite adequately. Excerpt from article…

The assumption that exporting democracy also exports our values is clearly wrong. It isn’t democracy that makes free people; it’s individual responsibility. Democracy with individual responsibility makes for a free nation. Democracy without individual responsibility is only another name for tyranny.

We have spent too much time looking at systems, when we should have been looking at values. We have wrongly assumed that all religions and all peoples share the same basic values that democracy can unleash for the betterment of all. That has clearly been proven to be wrong.

If we had looked instead at a poll which showed that 4 out of 5 Egyptians believe that adulterers should be stoned and thieves should have their hands cut off, we would have known how this democracy experiment was going to end and how much damage it would do to our national interests.

It’s time to stop putting our faith in democracy. Democracy for all is not the answer. Responsibility for all is. Our responsibility is not to agnostically empower other people to make the choices that will destroy our way of life, but to make those choices that will keep our way of life alive.

Democracy Is Not the Answer | FrontPage Magazine

 

[Mr Natural]

Stabil is the stuff you put in your gas to keep it from going bad.

 

[Sunni Man]

People in the Middle East have no problem with using Democracy as a way to choose their leaders.

But still want to retain their traditions and culture.


Trouble is the Western nations want to force a 'secular' form of democracy on the people.

And expect them to reject their traditions and cultures in exchange for Western values and customs. ..

 

[numan]

'
"Democracy" is merely a delusion which has never existed in the real world -- though there have been episodes in which the ignorant, mindless masses have gotten their dirty paws on the levers of power, invariably with disastrous results.

The limitations of the theory of democracy have been understood by sensible thinkers ever since the the days of the ancient Greeks.

The people have legitimate concerns which need to be expressed and acted upon -- but not by them!! They have neither the intelligence nor practical ability to handle complex problems competently.

For proof, just look at most of the postings on this site !! · ·

The idea that in a popular vote a semi-informed electorate can give
intelligent direction to a national administration faced with
intricate and unforeseen problems goes against all common sense. A
great deal of flattery and a good deal of hypocrisy enters into the
assumption that in a modern society, ostensibly democratic, the
people decide anything.
---Robert M. Adams, Decadent Societies
.

 

[Bleipriester]

'
"Democracy" is merely a delusion which has never existed in the real world -- though there have been episodes in which the ignorant, mindless masses have gotten their dirty paws on the levers of power, invariably with disastrous results.

The limitations of the theory of democracy have been understood by sensible thinkers ever since the the days of the ancient Greeks.

The people have legitimate concerns which need to be expressed and acted upon -- but not by them!! They have neither the intelligence nor practical ability to handle complex problems competently.

For proof, just look at most of the postings on this site !! · ·

The idea that in a popular vote a semi-informed electorate can give
intelligent direction to a national administration faced with
intricate and unforeseen problems goes against all common sense. A
great deal of flattery and a good deal of hypocrisy enters into the
assumption that in a modern society, ostensibly democratic, the
people decide anything.
---Robert M. Adams, Decadent Societies
.

Not really. I think political interested people like forum members are better informed than "standard" citizens. Sure, many protect their political side and truth sometimes got to the dogs thereby, but its still better than the uninterested masses. The uninterested masses are the hotbed, on which the politician´s despotism grows.

 

[numan]

'
So you think the ignorant and uninterested are worse than the deluded, jingoistic and misinformed?

Better look at the recent history of Germany -- and the United States !!

.

 

[Bleipriester]

'
So you think the ignorant and uninterested are worse than the deluded, jingoistic and misinformed?

Better look at the recent history of Germany -- and the United States !!

.

You think the ignorant and uninterested aren´t deluded, jingoistic and misinformed?

 

[Polk]

We all love freedom and wealth. Almost everybody does, but the accomplishable amount of freedom depends on the political situation. The Arab Spring shows, that you cannot "bring democracy" to extremists. Tunesia, Egypt, etc: let them vote and you´ll get a Islamist extremist government, that deprives 50 % of the population, the women, of their rights.
Chaos and violence govern in former peaceful regions. Escapees storm our already stressed Europe and Islamist terrorism establishes around it.

As a result, democracy is not a proper solution for most of these countries.

Tunisia is going through some of the difficulties any young democracy faces and the situation in Egypt is a farce (Morsi should never have been driven from power).

 

[jwoodie]

There are two principal benefits of democracy: Externally, democracies are less likely to start wars. Internally, they are less likely to foment social unrest and/or revolution.

 

[Pheonix]

Democracies work... in small groups. I was part of a 'democracy' for a Simulation that we had, and it worked out very nicely- but there were only about fifteen of us and we were all friends. The problem with democracy is that the vote of the many can take away the rights of the few.

In regards to the 'better informed people of the US message boards and elsewhere', there are a mix of better informed, and people who think they are better informed, and people who just want to get into an argument.

It is my opinion (if I may be slightly hypocritical for a second) that butting heads over the internet, whether you are better informed or not, is only a waste of time when you could be out doing something to make a real difference.

Not that trying to convince other people of your point over the internet is useless, but people go about it the wrong way, (Starting of with "If you don't think this, you're stupid." that just puts defenses up.) and people come on sites like these with the wrong attitude. (They're not thinking "Hey, maybe someone will enlighten me!" they're thinking "Where can I pound my opinions into someone else's head?")

 

[PredFan]

Democracy:

Two wolves and a lamb voting on what's for dinner.