Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: Evngelism of Democracy

  1. #1
    God/dess threlayer's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    5,921
    Thanks
    369
    Thanked 419 Times in 290 Posts
    My Mood
    Fine

    Default Evangelism of Democracy

    When can one push one's ideals too far into other peoples' lives? Democracy may be a solution for many countries, but it has to be their own idea. GWB's blind-sided, single approach to all international problem areas is just as bullyish as is his religious ideas, IMO. This editorial discusses some of that. As a country we need to recognize this and discuss it.

    Democracy: Walking the Walk
    President Bush's talk of the power of freedom is inspiring. But it's hardly sufficient when it's selective and hypocritical.

    By Jonathan Alter
    Newsweek

    Jan. 24 issue - You've heard the explanations of why John Kerry is not raising his right hand in front of the Capitol this week. Anxieties about security, a failure to share the voters' moral values and the "toughness gap" between Democrats and Republicans are the most common theories. But there's another reason Kerry never connected: he failed to tap into the idealism of the American people. In part because he was so ambivalent about Iraq, he never spoke convincingly about spreading democracy around the world, opting instead for less-stirring calls for realism and multilateralism. It's as if Kerry found it a little hokey to talk too much about freedom.

    President Bush does not. The theme of his Inaugural Address, he says, is that freedom brings peace and security. Personally, I'm a sucker for this kind of rhetoric and I wish more liberals could shed their self-consciousness about using it. But even though evangelism about democracy is necessary for any successful president, it is not sufficient. Just as we are grasping anew the limits of power, we will soon re-learn the limits of idealism.

    The president did not originally invade Iraq for idealistic reasons. Bush did it to show toughness against available Arab bad guys after 9/11, to take care of unfinished family business with Saddam and because his gut—in which he places the fate of the nation—wrongly told him that Iraq possessed WMDs that could be painlessly removed. (The search for such weapons officially ended last week.) Now Bush cleverly depicts the war as a noble struggle to bring freedom to the Middle East. He presses "The Case for Democracy," by Natan Sharansky, into the hands of visitors, even though Sharansky makes a point of writing that early elections in countries seeking a democratic future can be harmful. Bush hopes "the vision thing" that so eluded his father will cast his administration in a rosy glow of good intentions and take some of the sting out of the losses in Iraq.

    Can a suspiciously convenient, third-string rationale for war also be sincere? Yes, because it's connected to how Bush sees his legacy, which is always the preoccupation of second-term presidents. Bush is a Woodrow Wilsonian idealist, not a Poppy Bush realist. While the president of Princeton and the president of DKE don't seem to have much in common (and the neocons would have thought the League of Nations was full of pantywaists), Bush, too, seeks to "make the world safe for democracy."

    But Bush prefers Ronald Reagan to Wilson as an exemplar, which begins to explain where his vision falls short. Reagan wasn't much interested in promoting democracy except as a weapon to destroy the Soviet Union from within. All over the world, dictators like Saddam Hussein cheered his election. Reaganism was effective and inspiring but also hypocritical—the kind of ersatz idealism that apparently allows Bush to press for democracy in every Middle Eastern country except the ones that sell us oil or help us fight terrorism. That's a rather long list. The Inaugural Address might as well contain an asterisk that says: "Does not apply to Saudi Arabia or any place else in the region besides Iraq and the Palestinian Authority."

    Idealism worthy of the name cannot be so instrumental and selective. If it isn't consistently applied—if it's used to shroud the truth—idealism is just another tactic. If Bush were serious about connecting his lofty democratic goals for the Middle East to the reality of the region, he would be working with Hillary Clinton and the Democrats on their idea for more international education. The love of freedom may, as the president movingly puts it, reside in every human heart, but it must also be nurtured in the young, just as the Saudis have funded madrassas to indoctrinate their dangerous Wahhabi views. But international education sounds wimpy to muscle-bound Republicans, so Clinton's proposal is DOA.

    If Bush wants to drive home his message, not just pontificate about it, he would also be leading by example on the ideals that bolster democracy, like transparency and accountability. He would stop dissembling about the true costs of his domestic dreams, from privatizing Social Security to making the tax cuts permanent. And he would be firing at least one or two of the policymakers who botched the war. Awarding them the Presidential Medal of Freedom was as if CBS had decided to nominate Dan Rather and his shoddy National Guard story for an Emmy.

    Like Woodrow Wilson, George W. Bush does not have the country behind him for a sweeping effort to remake the world in our image. So for now, his idealistic vision remains just words in the January air, a game attempt to ennoble suffering and failure, sincere but not serious.


    © 2005 Newsweek, Inc.
    Last edited by threlayer; 01-29-2005 at 02:29 PM. Reason: typos, that [font] thing
    I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.

    Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.

    NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.

  2. #2
    Banned Melonie's Avatar
    Joined
    Jul 2002
    Location
    way south of the border
    Posts
    25,932
    Thanks
    612
    Thanked 10,563 Times in 4,646 Posts
    Blog Entries
    3
    My Mood
    Cynical

    Default Re: Evngelism of Democracy

    time for some additional journalistic balance ...

  3. #3
    Banned
    Joined
    Jan 2003
    Location
    B.C & USA
    Posts
    1,869
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts

    Default Re: Evngelism of Democracy

    ^ oh please !

    National Poo is nothing more than a tabloid -- like The Star or Enquirer.

    Recently a writer from the National Poo was caught having taken money to support Bush in the National Poo

    No journalist balance there, sorry .

  4. #4
    Moderator Djoser's Avatar
    Joined
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Key West
    Posts
    16,343
    Thanks
    1,395
    Thanked 5,487 Times in 2,768 Posts

    Default Re: Evangelism of Democracy

    Quote Originally Posted by threlayer
    The Inaugural Address might as well contain an asterisk that says: "Does not apply to Saudi Arabia...
    I have always detested our support of this monarchy, the birthplace of Osama. I found it particularly disturbing that when we bailed their asses out of danger in the first Iraq war, our female soldiers had to submit to all kinds of policies designed to avoid affending their sensiblities concerning the attire and deportment of women.
    You must have chaos within you to give birth to a dancing star.
    Friedrich Nietzsche

    Free your mind, and your ass will follow.
    George Clinton

    ______________________________________

  5. #5
    God/dess threlayer's Avatar
    Joined
    Aug 2003
    Location
    Syracuse
    Posts
    5,921
    Thanks
    369
    Thanked 419 Times in 290 Posts
    My Mood
    Fine

    Default About their treatment of women

    It's one of those religious things. I tried to talk them out of that discrimination (I really did), but they didn't see it as discrimination. They, both men and women, saw it as just behavior prescribed by God.

    I think, as the women get older, some of them see it as more prescribed by the Devil.
    I loved going to strip clubs; I actually made some friends there. Now things are different for the clubs and for me. As a result I am not as happy.

    Customers are not entitled to grope, disrespect, or rob strippers. This is their job, not their hobby, and they all need income. Clubs are not just some erotic show for guys to view while drinking.

    NOTE: anything I post here, outside of a direct quote, is my opinion only, which I am entitled to. Take it for what you estimate it is worth.

  6. #6
    Featured Member Destiny's Avatar
    Joined
    Apr 2003
    Posts
    1,355
    Thanks
    0
    Thanked 5 Times in 5 Posts

    Default Re: Evangelism of Democracy

    Quote Originally Posted by Djoser
    I have always detested our support of this monarchy, the birthplace of Osama. I found it particularly disturbing that when we bailed their asses out of danger in the first Iraq war, our female soldiers had to submit to all kinds of policies designed to avoid affending their sensiblities concerning the attire and deportment of women.
    I agree 100% with Dj on this one.

    Wow, never thought I'd say that.

    Two thoughts on spreading democracy throughout the world. First, our nation was founded on the principle that people ought to be free. From the Declaration of Independence:

    But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

    Our country has always believed that people should be free and that to one extent or another we should help them pursue those goals. The idea that democracy is good for people isn't GWB's idea, it's as old as America. The question of how idealistic or how pragmatic our country should be is one that reasonable people can disagree on. However, for GWB to preach the merits of democracy and never mention Saudi Arabia is down right hypocritical.

    Second, democracy is in our own best interests. Look at the countries causing trouble in the world today. Whether its' pursuing nuclear weapons, threatening their neighbors, or promoting terroism, all of the troublemakers are dictatorships. That's not an accident. Look at North Korea. They continue working to develop nuclear weapons. Meanwhile, their people are starving to death. If the people were given a real choice, which woulld they choose, to buy food or build bombs? Promoting democracy in the world is good for our own security. The more democratic governments in the world, the less trouble.
    Dancing is wonderful training for girls, it's the first way you learn to guess what a man is going to do before he does it. ~Christopher Morley, Kitty Foyle

Similar Threads

  1. Democracy Democrat Style
    By Deogol in forum Member Boards
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 08-27-2008, 07:23 AM
  2. Democracy (sort of) comes to Saudi Arabia
    By myssi in forum Political Poo
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: 02-12-2005, 10:50 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •