Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84 exptools; site ihlpg.UUCP Path: utzoo!lsuc!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!ihnp4!ihlpg!tan From: tan@ihlpg.UUCP (Bill Tanenbaum) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: On Democracy Message-ID: <1616@ihlpg.UUCP> Date: Mon, 10-Feb-86 17:15:30 EST Article-I.D.: ihlpg.1616 Posted: Mon Feb 10 17:15:30 1986 Date-Received: Wed, 12-Feb-86 00:41:22 EST References: <109@mit-eddie.UUCP> Distribution: net.politics Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories Lines: 88 > [Larry Kolodney] > People on this list have a fettish with a certain formal system of > government known as representative democracy. > > They seem to feel that countries which have this form of government > are inherently good. That the people there are happy, or what have > you. They also seem to feel that it is the (God-given?) duty of the > United States to insure that all nations without such a form of > government get one, and soon. - Countries are neither inherently good nor evil. GOVERNMENTS that are totalitarian or authoritarian are inherently evil. Benevolent despotism flunks because there is no way to guarantee the despot remains benevolent. --- > Wake up people! Democracy is a means to an end, not an end unto > itself. (That end being the construction and maintainence of a > society which permits the maximum feasable amount of personal and > societal growth.) Democracy is only a meaningful concept in societies > in which the voting population is composed of relatively autonomous > informed agents, and where the people who make up that governmnent > actually beleive in it. > > Think about your own lives. How much of your happiness depends on the > fact that we have a republican democracy in this country? How much of > it depends upon your income, your perceptions of your security, and > ability to find a satisfying social niche? - PLENTY of my happiness comes from the fact. Ask anyone who has recently come here from the Soviet Union, giving up their income and social niches in the process. As far as I am concerned, democracy is my second priority, exceeded only by having enough to eat. --- > The Philipine constitution is virtually identical to ours. Why then > can Marcos rule as a dictator for 20 years? And why is there a > significant Marxist insurgency? (Or, why isn't there one in this country?) > > Oh, but they don't have a true Democracy in the Philipines, you might > say. OK, how does it differ from ours, except in degree? ----- 1) The suspension, by Marcos, of free elections for 20 years. The Phillipines has not been a democracy since 1972 at least. 2) The assassination, by Marcos or his supporters, of Benigno (sp?) Aquino. 3) The massive accumulation of personal wealth by Marcos and his family. 4) The jailing of many of Marcos' political opponents. ----- > El Salvador has supposedly free elections. What good were they? The > Army is still more powerful than the President. And the entire > government is subservient to the orders of the U.S. ambassodor. Land > reform is at a standstill, and the majority of the populace lives in > squalor. > > There is no U.S. style democracy in Yugoslavia, yet by any measure, the > potiential for personal development is much higher there than in > Salvador. ----- Apples and oranges. You are comparing a European country at peace to a third world country in the middle of a civil war. Why not compare Yugoslavia with Greece or Italy and El Salvador with Nicaragua. ---- > Do you think Guatamalan indians care about democratic government, or > about living lives which give them dignity and self-respect. If a > relatively benign dictatorship could give that to them much faster > than a democratic form of government, do you think that will give them pause? > > It is not at all clear to me that American Style democracy is a valid > model for developing third world countries. A stable democracy > requires that a majority of the population be sufficiently satisfied > with their lot to be willing to accept the position of loyal > opposition. In most third world countries, being out of power means > being excluded from the fruits of development. This is intolerable in > a country that is underdevloped. ---- If so, how come democracy has, on its own without U. S. intervention, been making such a strong comeback in South America. Even Bolivia, the poorest country in South America, has a democratic government. Those Bolivians know something you apparently have not learned yet. ----- > We may try to foist our pie in the sky scheme on others, but as the > filipino example clearly illustrates, if a society is not ready for > it, we are just wasting our time. ----- If you think the Phillipines were not ready for democracy, you must love Marcos. That was his very argument for declaring martial law. I assume, therefore, that you must support him. (only 1/2 -) ) ----- -- Bill Tanenbaum - AT&T Bell Labs - Naperville IL ihnp4!ihlpg!tan