Democracy

Posted on Democracy

mark twain on government and democracy

i couldn’t decide on just one of these quotes, so you get to read both of them. 🙂 read and enjoy.

Only a government that is rich and safe can afford to be a democracy, for democracy is the most expensive and nefarious kind of government ever heard of on earth.

good point. democracies not only have an expensive financial cost, they also have an expensive social/cultural cost as well. some social/cultural systems are more compatible with democracy than others, and we should recognize that and adjust our political strategy to account for that difference.

Each of you, for himself, by himself and on his own responsibility, must speak. And it is a solemn and weighty responsibility, and not lightly to be flung aside at the bullying of pulpit, press, government, or the empty catchphrases of politicians. Each must for himself alone decide what is right and what is wrong, and which course is patriotic and which isn’t. You cannot shirk this and be a man. To decide against your convictions is to be an unqualified and inexcusable traitor, both to yourself and to your country, let man label you as they may. If you alone of all the nation shall decide one way, and that way be the right way according to your convictions of the right, you have done your duty by yourself and by your country- hold up your head! You have nothing to be ashamed of.

i have nothing to add to this.

Posted on Democracy

promoting democracy: a failed experiment?

Nobody knows whether the election win for Hamas will help or hurt the cause of democracy in the Middle East. On the one hand, the victory of a terrorist party seems to vindicate the argument that democracy can only work where modern mores and social institutions are already in place. On the other hand, there is at least a scenario in which either Hamas is forced to transform itself, or the ultimate failure of Hamas teaches the Palestinians a culture-changing lesson in what real democracy requires.

Ideally, I would prefer to go the route of slow cultural transition before giving democracy a try. The danger of premature democracy is exactly what weÂ’re seeing now. Yet I recognize that we cannot afford the luxury of slow-motion cultural transformation. The pressure of nuclear proliferation has forced us to try something drastic and risky. The stakes, arguably, justify the risk.

stanley kurtz– the corner on nro

here are a few questions we should ask ourselves in determining the success or failure of this experiment. let’s have the debate. is promoting democracy the best way to fight the war on terror? have we considered that a change to democratic government may not be the first step for a country unfamiliar with how that system of government works? kurtz makes an excellent point here when he says that there is more involved in establishing a working democracy than simply having elections. read the whole post. he is absolutely right. i’m not sure that the bush administration has completely thought through the implications of this approach to the war on terror.

i’m not opposed to democracy. i believe that it is the best form of government for the United States, even though it doesn’t work in an error-free fashion for us either. we need to remember that the current version of our democratic system wasn’t automatically created at our country’s first breath. it took 200 + years to get where we are today. we can’t expect iraq, afghanistan, and other mideast countries to understand how democracy works right away after having limited to no experience with that form of government.

that said, if we really want these countries to elect their own leaders, then we have to live with the results of those elections. it’s easier to be in opposition than to be the ruling party, as hamas will soon find out. when your party is out of power, you can make all sorts of irresponsible statements and advocate many impractical policy changes, without being held to account for the results of your actions. that changes when your party is in power.

part of this post from the therapy sessions says this better than i just did:

To take power is to take responsibility. When you run an organization on the fringe – Hezballah in Lebanon, The Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, al Qaeda throughout the region – you can say and do what you like, even with the tacit approval of those in power.

When you are in charge, things change. The terrible economy is not an advantage – something you can complain about to generate support; it is a liability. It is your job to make it better (and only economic freedom creates economic growth). If you sponsor attacks in other countries, these are not just suicide bombings, they are acts of war.

No more shadowy groups hiding in the fringes. If these groups take power democratically, so be it. If that leads to civil wars, that’s sad – but we might as well get them over with.

For a century, we tolerated dictators in the region as the price of stability, but there was another hidden price: behind the scenes, thousands of fringe groups were taking the hearts of the people – or so they thought. This policy has been shattered by Bush, and those groups are being told: put up or shut up.

These are good things.

this argument makes sense to me. i do think that america is not obligated to financially support groups like hamas, whether they are democratically elected or not. (the whole concept of foreign aid is flawed as a general theory…but that’s a subject for another post.) the people will find out whether hamas is worthy to rule by what they do with the power they have been given. the same goes for the governments of iraq and afghanistan. these countries may have to learn a few painful lessons along the way, but eventually i think that they will figure it out. we did.

the results of promoting democracy are mixed so far. time will tell whether we will achieve the desired results of this experiment.

other good stuff to read:

Is there a place for democracy in the Middle East?–iraq the model
Can Democracy Stop Terrorism?–an balanced look at our current policy in the mideast from foreignaffairs.org
Welcome Hamas–quoted here (from the therapy sessions blog)

Posted on Democracy

because it is still true…. (re-post)

“Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it…”

“Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then?”

“The only obligation I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.”

“There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.”

–henry david thoreau, from civil disobedience

my hero. for too long, we have resigned ourselves to a government structure that encourages corruption and wasteful spending. this criticism is not restricted to a single political party. the current system is broken, and it’s up to us to demand changes in that system. i believe that the american people are starting to realize that change is possible, and that we can play a part in the implementation of that change.

why is it that so many people in this country have disconnected from the political process? it is because they have become disillusioned with politicians who make and break big promises to them. it is because they can’t see the difference between republicans and democrats right now. it is also because they have become convinced that there is nothing they can do to change the system. so they give up and vote for the lesser of two evils, for a third party, or for nobody at all.

it’s time to shed the woe-is-me attitude. a democracy such as ours is crippled unless everyone plays a part in its growth and continued evolution. if you don’t like what’s going on in washington, speak up. if you’re tired of excessive government spending and useless regulations on everything, stomp your feet and make some noise (and talk to your congressmen and senators while you are at it). we must demand accountability from our elected officials and hold their feet to the fire on promises they made — but only if they are good policy for the country.

active participation means that we stay engaged in the political process. being an informed voter is important. being an informed citizen and agent of accountability for elected officials is more important. if we do not want our country to be ruled by the whims of small numbers of connected political irritants, we must not stay silent. speak up. there’s no better time than now.

to those already in d.c., we ask you to care more about what we want and need. we require that you ask us, and honestly listen to the answer. if you cannot in good conscience serve us in good faith, then we will support someone else to replace you. that’s a threat, not a promise. think about it. then do the right thing.

Technorati :

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

do we really want iraq to be like the united states?

think about that question.

while it’s true that the united states is an outstanding model, in most measures of the concept, for the way freedom and democracy should work, there are some areas where we don’t have all of the answers. this country is a relatively young one, compared to some of its neighbors in the world community. so it’s understandable if we haven’t exactly gotten the balance between an extreme authoritarian state like iran and the permissiveness of the netherlands quite right just yet. iran’s government has some major problems, one of which being that the head guy is a loon. i’m not excusing any of what iran’s dictators say or do in the interest of smacking down the slightest offense against sharia law. they are absolutely wrong about pretty much everything, and i really oppose them having nukes. don’t misunderstand what i’m going to say next.

we are generally a tolerant and permissive society of people here in america, sometimes to a fault. we are so concerned about offending other people that we make extreme concessions to the smallest group with a nervous tic about anything. there are so many gray areas in what’s permissible that this gray has become the new black.

in fact, we tolerate too much in this country. is it something to be proud of that two of our main exports in the culture arena include raw hip-hop and britney spears? americans have also been the creators of trash tv and tv shows that ask “who’s the father of this baby?”. there are many things about our culture that we shouldn’t export to other countries. many of our current tv shows fall into this category, especially the reality tv on mtv and vh1.

we should also keep female pop star-inspired fashions confined to this country, and not inflict that indecency on the good citizens of iraq. modesty has gotten a bad rap because of the extreme interpretation of what that means under islamic law. there’s something to be said for leaving something to the imagination. that doesn’t mean that i think women should be covered head to toe. i just don’t think that copying the style of britney, christina, gwen stefani, or lil’ kim will get them the respect and advancement they are looking for in society.

the iraqis will benefit from the adoption of a more democratic government in their country. women and minorities will benefit from the change as well. their version of a democratic society may differ somewhat from the american version, and that’s ok. even though we have a pretty good handle on democracy here in america, that doesn’t mean we have all the right answers on everything else.

Posted on Conservatives, Democracy

all politics is local (attn: SC residents)

“We are not afraid to entrust the American people with unpleasant facts, foreign ideas, alien philosophies, and competitive values. For a nation that is afraid to let its people judge the truth and falsehood in an open market is a nation that is afraid of its people.”

~JFK~

this is the fight we need to have. i believe that so often most of us, especially conservatives, have gotten frustrated by the political process, and some have even stopped believing that someone who truly represents our values can actually be elected to serve in D.C. i was one of those people once. it’s discouraging what has happened to honest debate over ideas and ideology in this country, and how it often ends up in name-calling and partisan feuding. that’s got to change. conservatives can win the battle of ideas, and we can start one candidate at a time.

fellow conservative readers/bloggers in SC, this is your opportunity to jump into the process and to get actively involved in supporting a candidate that more accurately represents what we believe than those currently in congress. that’s why i’m asking you to support park gillespie, the other republican candidate for SC’s 5th district. he will have a tough battle ahead, but i believe with the support of all of us, he can be the representative that we thought we were electing to the white house. i will be posting further info here once the website officially launches. in the meantime, google is your friend. 🙂

the battle of ideas will be joined in SC’s 5th district. will you be a part of the debate? we cannot sit on the sidelines. it’s time to get involved.

current discussions of the french riots continue below.

by the way… (because i never bury the lead) in case you avoided watching alias, vaughn’s still dead.

previous:

Technorati : , , ,

Posted on Democracy, Republicans

it’s time to shed the woe-is-me attitude.

“Let every man make known what kind of government would command his respect, and that will be one step toward obtaining it…”

“Must the citizen ever for a moment, or in the least degree, resign his conscience to the legislator? Why has every man a conscience then?”

“The only obligation I have a right to assume is to do at any time what I think right.”

“There will never be a really free and enlightened State until the State comes to recognize the individual as a higher and independent power, from which all its own power and authority are derived, and treats him accordingly.”

–henry david thoreau, from civil disobedience

my hero. for too long, we have resigned ourselves to a government structure that encourages corruption and wasteful spending. this criticism is not restricted to a single political party. the current system is broken, and it’s up to us to demand changes in that system. i believe that the american people are starting to realize that change is possible, and that we can play a part in the implementation of that change.

why is it that so many people in this country have disconnected from the political process? it is because they have become disillusioned with politicians who make and break big promises to them. it is because they can’t see the difference between republicans and democrats right now. it is also because they have become convinced that there is nothing they can do to change the system. so they give up and vote for the lesser of two evils, for a third party, or for nobody at all.

it’s time to shed the woe-is-me attitude. a democracy such as ours is crippled unless everyone plays a part in its growth and continued evolution. if you don’t like what’s going on in washington, speak up. if you’re tired of excessive government spending and useless regulations on everything, stomp your feet and make some noise (and talk to your congressmen and senators while you are at it). we must demand accountability from our elected officials and hold their feet to the fire on promises they made — but only if they are good policy for the country.

active participation means that we stay engaged in the political process. being an informed voter is important. being an informed citizen and agent of accountability for elected officials is more important. if we do not want our country to be ruled by the whims of small numbers of connected political irritants, we must not stay silent. speak up. there’s no better time than now.

to those already in d.c., we ask you to care more about what we want and need. we require that you ask us, and honestly listen to the answer. if you cannot in good conscience serve us in good faith, then we will support someone else to replace you. that’s a threat, not a promise. think about it. then do the right thing.

Technorati :

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

all about iraq

Zawahiri’s Advice –power line has a great analysis of zawahiri’s letter here.
Zarqawi’s Losing Strategy–austin bay puts a positive spin on the post-war strategy
IRAQ: Status of Iraq?s insurgency–very balanced look at this subject from the CFR

Can Democracy Stop Terrorism?— this article from foreignaffairs. org suggests that there’s no evidence that it can. he argues that we should encourage all political factions to engage in the process, and that this would result in more stable governments. i agree with this last point, and i hope that’s what we are doing now in iraq.

two slightly different views on the iraqi constitution:
Iraq Parliament OKs Constitution Compromise –from FNC
Iraqi MPs approve charter changes — from the BBC

here are some excerpts from the proposed iraqi constitution. interpret for yourself.

Article 7:

First: No entity or program, under any name, may adopt racism, terrorism, the calling of others infidels, ethnic cleansing, or incite, facilitate, glorify, promote, or justify thereto, especially the Saddamist Baath in Iraq and its symbols, regardless of the name that it adopts. This may not be part of the political pluralism in Iraq. This will be organized by law.

Second: The State shall undertake combating terrorism in all its forms, and shall work to protect its territories from being a base or pathway or field for terrorist activities.

Article 14:
Iraqis are equal before the law without discrimination based on gender, race, ethnicity, origin, color, religion, creed, belief or opinion, or economic and social status.

Article 20:
The citizens, men and women, have the right to participate in public affairs and to enjoy political rights including the right to vote, to elect and to nominate.

Article 36:
The state guarantees in a way that does not violate public order and morality:
A. Freedom of expression, through all means.
B. Freedom of press, printing, advertisement, media and publication.
C. Freedom of assembly and peaceful demonstration. This shall be regulated by law.

my favorite part of article 65:
A nominee to the Presidency must meet the following conditions:
C. Must be of good reputation and political experience, and known for his integrity, righteousness, fairness and loyalty to the homeland.

i stuck article 65 in because i think these are good qualities we should have for america’s leaders too. we could do worse (and we have) than following these standards for OUR leaders. do yourself a favor and read the whole thing.

Technorati : , ,

Posted on Democracy, Iraq

the war on terrorism

the terrorists struck again over the weekend in indonesia. there has been a long history of terrorist activity in that country. the fact it took this long for an attack to happen again is neither reassuring nor comforting.

perhaps we are taking the wrong approach in this war on terrorism. i’m not sure that military force will stop the true militant ideologues in the muslim world in al Qaeda from being evil and blowing things up. that said, getting rid of saddam was a good thing, and i’m not sorry he’s not ruler of iraq right now. i also believe that aside from the WMDs, he was complicit in aiding and abetting terrorists. this alone should be a good enough reason to remove him from power. my complaint is not with the iraq project, it is with the PR effort.

throughout our history, we have tried to solve problems by brute force and sometimes even diplomacy. the right approach is a balance of both. we need to come to an understanding that changing hearts and minds in the middle east is an incremental process. even countries with a long history of democracy still struggle with it, so we can’t expect iraq or its neighbors to embrace all the changes right away.

president bush has the right idea in trying to spread the ideals of freedom and democracy around the world. but when he appoints karen hughes to spearhead the effort, it makes one wonder whether he is taking this seriously. we should be able to come up with someone better to share our message and counter the anti-american rhetoric often represented on arab tv/radio. al-jazeera for example. when the voices of anti-american muslims are the only ones heard, what alternative do their listeners have? we have a good case to present to them. we need to do a better job in presenting this case.

even with our best diplomatic argument presented, it is possible that there will still be fanatics with explosives who remain unconvinced of america’s good intentions. there’s nothing we can do about that. the goal should be to convince the arab-speaking world not to support the fringe elements among them. we can achieve this. we just need the right people to represent us to the arab world.

Technorati : , , , ,

Posted on Conservatives, Democracy

p.j. o’rourke’s take on the role of government

this linked article is long but it’s a message rarely heard by today’s politicians, whether liberal or conservative. i’ll post a couple quotes from it here, but the whole thing is totally worth reading. here’s the first of two —

“By observing the progress of mankind, we can see that the things that are good for everyone are the things that have increased the accountability of the individual, the respect for the individual and the power of the individual to master his own fate. Judaism gave us laws before which all men, no matter their rank, stood as equals. Christianity taught us that each person has intrinsic worth, Newt Gingrich and Pat Schroeder included. The rise of private enterprise and trade provided a means of achieving wealth and autonomy other than by killing people with broadswords. And the industrial revolution allowed millions of ordinary folks an opportunity to obtain decent houses, food and clothes (albeit with some unfortunate side effects, such as environmental da mage and Albert Gore).”

in America, you succeed or fail by your own hand. if we all came to grips with that concept, we wouldnÂ’t require the government to take care of us. and by the way, it is OUR money that the government takes to finance all these bloated, ineffective social programs. if we truly realized this, we would junk this idealistic bent for the government to provide everything for everybody.

More P.J. —

“Government is an abstract entity. It doesn’t produce anything. It isn’t a business, a factory or a farm. Government can’t create wealth; only individuals can. All government is able to do is move wealth around. In the name of fairness government can take wealth from those who produce it and give wealth to those who don’t. But who’s going to be the big Robin Hood? Who grabs all this stuff and hands it back out? (Remember: even in a freely elected system of government, sooner or later that person is going to be someone you loathe. If you’re a Republican, think about Donna Shalala; if you’re a Democrat, think about Ollie North.)”

capitalism is not a zero-sum game. in the free market, everybody benefits. everybody gets a slice of the pie. the producers of the wealth always end up with more than those who sit on their couch and play xbox all day. the government cannot fix this. that’s just the way it is…and exactly how it should be.

read this brilliant explanation of conservatism for yourself.