| Welcome to The New Coffee Room. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Prerequisites for Democracy | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Mar 10 2006, 03:10 PM (91 Views) | |
| Rick Zimmer | Mar 10 2006, 03:10 PM Post #1 |
|
Fulla-Carp
|
In a thread long lost after several days, I laid out what many political scientists believe are the cultural and political values which must be in place if a democracy is to be established and grow. I also linked to any article by a political scientist using historical references to show why a democracy cannot grow in a violent society. It could be established, perhaps even last a few years, but in a society where a large group of people see violence as an option, the democracy would not gain a strong enough foothold to become permanent, that the government would soon be overthrown and a dictator would again gain power. Many on here disagreed with the list I posted as well as the article. Some simply dismissed it. Some took the list point by point and disagreed. Fair enough, although it's easy to just say "I disagree." But almost no one indicated what they felt were the prerequisites in a society in order for democracy to take hold, become established and and last. I believe FrankM was the only one who argued for a prequisite value -- quoting Sharansky on free speech as a (the?) prerequisite) So, to those of you who did not agree with what I posted, do you think there are prerequisites necessary in a society for it to be able to establish and grow a democracy? Do there have to be certain cultural and political values held by most of the people? If so, what do you think they are? Also, do you think the people must hold these values at the beginning, even if they have not been acted on, or is it possible that a society that does not have them can just agree to start having them and that, by dong so, they can keep from reverting to their historical values when things get rough? As an example of what I mean.... Is it important that the people hold a value that the law applies equally to everyone? Or that they agree that all opinions should be allowed in the poliitical marketplace? Do they need to see violence as totally unacceptable as a way to solve problems? Do they need see and accept compromise as the only acceptable way of reaching agreement? I am not suggesting these, just giving examples. Try to stand back from what is going on in Iraq and take on the role of political scientist, since these should be applicable to almost all societies. Come up with your list, if you think there is one, and then apply it to Iraq if you wish. As an alternative to the above, do you perhaps think there are no cultural mores or political values that need to exist and be strong in a society before a democracy can be put into place and made permanent? I look forward to hearing what all of you political scientists have to say. |
| [size=4]Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul -- Benedict XVI[/size] | |
![]() |
|
| Mikhailoh | Mar 10 2006, 03:22 PM Post #2 |
|
If you want trouble, find yourself a redhead
|
I think that democracy as a form of government is new enough that, although we can look at what has happened historically, I doubt there is enough data to clearly define what must be or not be present. I believe what people objected to, Rick, is the laundry list of prerequisites that, to my knowledge, have not been present in totality or even majority at the formation of any nascent democracy. I think you build it a step at a time. The major key, that I can see, is that the people of a nation have to, for whatever reason, want that form of government and be willing to stand up for it and expect it. And I think we have more than sufficient evidence of that in Iraq. The fact that there is violent dissent aimed at short-circuiting the effort is no indicator that democracy will fail there. Success or failure in Iraq will be primarily determined by the Iraqis themselves and in lesser role by our continued support, not political scientists making pronouncements and lists that would seem to doom any effort. One never know what one can do until one does it. |
|
Once in his life, every man is entitled to fall madly in love with a gorgeous redhead - Lucille Ball | |
![]() |
|
| FrankM | Mar 10 2006, 03:44 PM Post #3 |
|
Senior Carp
|
Despite my dismissal of it the other night I think this is an excellent topic for discussion. I will post on it when I get a chance to compose my thoughts on it. Let me just say this for now. I agree it's an up-hill battle for establishing democracy in Iraq. I agree in particular that long-standing internal divisions make a country ripe for the dominant faction seizing control once outside involvement ends. There are many recent examples of this which I'll go into in a future post in this thread. For now i will say that Democratization can indeed backfiore and actually be a catalyst for war. But my premise is that sustained outside involvement, not just from the US, is necessary to make it work. I did post in another thread that I expect the US and hopefully others will stay the course for as long as it takes ... and, yes, it will likely take a long time. I expect the insurgency to peter out soon. It's the sectarian militias that will be the longer term problem. |
![]() |
|
| « Previous Topic · The New Coffee Room · Next Topic » |






4:21 PM Jul 10