Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
actually since democracies are mod rule...it is a problem
example; while egypt might be a frying pan right now with a dictator.. the fire would be the radical muslim brotherhood
pick a winner...
Assuming that the Muslim Brotherhood becomes the government and not some coalition with Elbaradei or other. Assuming that they adopt a pure democracy and not some form of Republic, Parliament, our governing council, assuming Mubarak appointed successor doesn't gain control. That is a lot of assumptions, not to mention since we've never seen the Muslim Brotherhood govern, we assume they will be the worst case scenario. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.
actually since democracies are mod rule...it is a problem
example; while egypt might be a frying pan right now with a dictator.. the fire would be the radical muslim brotherhood
pick a winner...
Your problem is you see it can ONLY be one or the other....
Interesting commentary on Al Jazeera this morning about how the USA doesn't really figure into this at all...no burning of the US flag,no Anti-American sentiment.....
The USA is not being seen as very important by the protesters.
Your problem is you see it can ONLY be one or the other....
Interesting commentary on Al Jazeera this morning about how the USA doesn't really figure into this at all...no burning of the US flag,no Anti-American sentiment.....
The USA is not being seen as very important by the protesters.
I noticed that right off the bat...the US is not the target of their frustrations.
How can you post a thread title as "....the rise of Middle Eastern Democracies" and then state you have no crystal ball as to if it is a democracy? Sounds like a bunch of double speak to me.
I don't see how Islamofacism is equated to a democracy as you are attempting. Past behavior is the best prediction of future behavior: Iran & the deposing of the Shah. There is no reason to believe that this is not what is happening right now in several Middle Eastern nations.
Would you call Venezuela under Hugo Chavez a democracy? Just because he was placed there by choice initially doesn't mean that the people do not live under a dictatorship now.
Actually, we do have to have an agreement upon what defines any particular type of government or there is no basis of common ground for a discussion. Power of the governing derived from the people is quite different than the over throw of a government and then a group exercising power over the people rather than derived from the people. At least, to me the difference in the actual government, as opposed to actions which allowed it to arise to power, are quite clear. YMMV.
Your post seems to ignore that it is the military that has been in power in Egypt for about the last 50 years. Mubarak is a figurehead, it is and has been in my lifetime the military with the real power in Egypt.
I think there is a distinction between what many Americans would consider a democracy, and what people around the world would consider a democracy. There is nothing inherent about a democracy that excludes religion from government. The separation of government and religion in the United States is not based on a vision of democracy, it is based on a vision of freedom, explicitly freedom of religion. The ideas we as Americans have about freedom of religion are not shared by people globally. And the conflicts we have in the United States about freedom of religion are not considered admirable around the world.
When Hilltopper discusses Middle East democracies, those democracies may be democracies in the sense that the power in the government is derived from the people. The new governments may be responsive to their citizens, but may be responsive in different ways than the United States government. Different problems require different solutions. But if the people have a greater voice in their governments and government policies, it will be a victory for democracy.
Sadly, the victory for democracy may have repercussions for the United States that we don't like. That is the legacy of many long-standing policies where our country talked the talk, but didn't walk the walk. We have been complicit in supporting many authoritarian regimes in that part of the world, both economically and politically, even while we talked about freedom and democracy. We did this because it benefited ourselves. We can argue that it benefited the region in question as well, because it promoted stability, and that stability led to economic growth, but in authoritarian systems, the growth did not mean wealth for the people, it meant wealth for a select few. And bitterness over that inequity, bitterness about being used, is the end result.
Culturally, America is part of the global structure. Our products have become global products. Our movies are seen around the world. We have changed the world in many subtle ways, and who we are has imbued a global identity that never existed before. That is part of our legacy, too, and how that will play out is still to be seen.
Assuming that the Muslim Brotherhood becomes the government and not some coalition with Elbaradei or other. Assuming that they adopt a pure democracy and not some form of Republic, Parliament, our governing council, assuming Mubarak appointed successor doesn't gain control. That is a lot of assumptions, not to mention since we've never seen the Muslim Brotherhood govern, we assume they will be the worst case scenario. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.
yes there are alot of assumptions
but as they say..."the devil you know, as opposed to the devil you dont know"
it is simular (not exactly the same but simular) to Iran... the shah was a dictator,, loved by some hated by some....but the aiotoliahs(sp?) are far worse
just because the 'people' vote -- mob rule-- a democracy...doesnt mean its always a good thing....the majority wanted and continued slavery here in the usa for nearly 100 years before it was abolished
Assuming that the Muslim Brotherhood becomes the government and not some coalition with Elbaradei or other. Assuming that they adopt a pure democracy and not some form of Republic, Parliament, our governing council, assuming Mubarak appointed successor doesn't gain control. That is a lot of assumptions, not to mention since we've never seen the Muslim Brotherhood govern, we assume they will be the worst case scenario. Maybe they will, maybe they won't.
This is a movement that basically will leave a vacuum and the odds of democracy in that part of the world is that good as far as maybes.
but as they say..."the devil you know, as opposed to the devil you dont know"
it is simular (not exactly the same but simular) to Iran... the shah was a dictator,, loved by some hated by some....but the aiotoliahs(sp?) are far worse
just because the 'people' vote -- mob rule-- a democracy...doesnt mean its always a good thing....the majority wanted and continued slavery here in the usa for nearly 100 years before it was abolished
You are absolutly right and I only disagree that it might not be a good thing for us. It may be a better thing for them, but that is the point and we just have to deal with the repercussions of such events.
If we in America espouse the concept of democracy, be it in whatever form, then either we believe this wholly or we do not. If and when we support these dictatorial regimes because they may benefit us, then we cheapen the whole concept of democracy and become little more than hypocrites.
How many times in your life have you ran across someone, a parent, friend or co-worker who espoused the "do as I say, not as I do" and found it grating and annoying?
I think DC said it better than I could in the following paragraph.
Quote:
Originally Posted by DC at the Ridge
Sadly, the victory for democracy may have repercussions for the United States that we don't like. That is the legacy of many long-standing policies where our country talked the talk, but didn't walk the walk. We have been complicit in supporting many authoritarian regimes in that part of the world, both economically and politically, even while we talked about freedom and democracy. We did this because it benefited ourselves. We can argue that it benefited the region in question as well, because it promoted stability, and that stability led to economic growth, but in authoritarian systems, the growth did not mean wealth for the people, it meant wealth for a select few. And bitterness over that inequity, bitterness about being used, is the end result.
I always maintained that the U.S. really needs to stop its overseas empire by stopping foreign aid and closing all foreign military bases and withdraw from the UN
Amen to that! What the heck are we doing with bases in Korea, Japan, Germany, etc. This is ludicrous. We may not agree on the role of the Fed Govt here at home, but who among us really believes we should have hundreds of bases all over the world, for what seems forever and ever.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Sounds like a bunch of double speak to me.
