I disagree. Democracy is the very best system of government so far discovered by human beings. There is no society for which it is not appropriate or beneficial.

That said, however, it is pointless to impose democracy by force, because societies which are alien to democracy will not see its benefits.

There is no shortage of Muslims who believe that the sinful democratic west should convert to Islamic sharia law for its own good. The repugnance you feel at that suggestion is exactly what the Iraqis feel about democracy.

The middle east will either evolve into democracy, or simply continue as it is until everyone is dead. We cannot speed the process up through military action.

A clever philosopher once said, there is more to governing people than deciding what to impose on them. The three known systems of governing people are: Monarchy (rule by the grace of God(s), Dictatorship, and Democracy.
For a monarchy to work requires at least 90% of peple to believe in religion and in the divine rights of the monarch; a dictatorship is the most effectively form of government as long as 50% of the people are uneducated i.e. unable to read and write; it is only after more than 50% of the people are literate that a democracy becomes the most effective form of government.
Now there is a suggestion here that democracy has its limits too. Once more than 90% of the people participate in the operation of a democracy this system becomes itself unacceptable, unworkable because democracy is seen as no more that dictoatorship by numbers.
Could ther be a higher form of government, under full literacy, that could cater for all people without imposing majority rules?

alfred, majority rule is the alternative to minority rule.

you shouldn't blame democracy for the state of australia, or the world. there is very little democracy on this planet, none at all here in oz.

i use aristotle's definition of democracy. this seems best since he wrote about it first, and was undisputed until the invention of newspeak. it is rule 'by the people', as lincoln put it.

I remember as a student of Latin American politics in the 1970s writing essays about why sustainable democracy was not possible in Argentina and Brazil, because their culture and demography wouldn’t support it. I was wrong.

I also felt the same shock the author describes listening to nostalgic East Germans when I heard Chilean acquaintances who said that Pinochet’s strong-arm tactics were necessary to avert the chaos that Allende was unleashing. They said Chile could not sustain prosperity, stability and democracy simultaneously. They were wrong.

In the 1980s it was common to argue that communism was undefeatable and the West’s best response was to accommodate and learn to live with it. This was wrong.

In the 1990s, Lee Kuan Yew led claims that western notions of democracy and individual liberty are incompatible with Asian values. The kleptocrats in Indonesia ran the same argument. They were wrong.

Now, it’s common to argue that democracy can’t work in Muslim countries, or Arab countries, or the middle East. Maybe this time it’s true, but I doubt it. For all the ineptitude and naivete of the US invasion and occupation, there’s no evidence that the Iraqi people hope for a return to dictatorship in future.

Reckon you are getting really carried away about the American
Way being the acme of democracy.

The problem it has a harshness about it that jars the nerves.

We know we needed them during WW2, but true we were glad to see them go.

Now going on 87, and having lost my wife after sixty three years, the family have put in Foxtel for me, and though I truly enjoy Aussie Country Music, I often turn off the American style owing to its lack of something, could be sweetness or folksiness, not sure. Maybe someone might tell me?

"the conviction that democracy and American values are the way, the truth and the light, and that fighting the good fight in Iraq would prove it."
What sort of nonsense is this? There are to date, 1.2million Iraqis murdered and 4.5million turned into refugees; how can anyone reconcile monstrous genocide and call it "democracy"? Let us not forget the original lie before the war began was "we are opposed to weapons of mass destruction" this from the biggest producer and seller of weapons of mass destruction. When this contradiction was pointed out then the lie was then changed. The whole historical century for the Middle East has been about colonial domination, rape and plunder. Pitting one side against another and selling both sides weapons. Or another cruelty, indirect rule using their proxies or Arab stooges to siphon off the oil wealth. The colonial agenda was spelt out back in the 1880's when the " great race is now on for colonial possessions, resources and prizes". At the same time never to lose sight of, the need to always check their trading rivals, slow their development down and bar their access and control of the local market. In Iraq the real enemy of the US was not Hussein but the French, Germans and Chinese who had interests and concessions in Iraqi oil and were looking for new oil deposits in the North. Much of what I am saying is spelt out in two books called 'Oil Wars' and 'The Great Chessboard'. The next incursion and similar lies and pretexts will be used to invade Iran for its oil and to dominate this region, one of the major crossroads of the world. The US has stated it wants world hegemony, world trade and domination. It is impossible to correctly estimate how many lives has been lost from the African continent over a full century, but my estimate is about 20 million lives.

Define democracy. As there seems to be a variety of 'democracies', what would a real one look like?

You don't know how refreshing it was to read this post. I am an American myself and a veteran of the Iraq war. I have become so disgusted with the rampant stupidity in my country that I actually moved out of it and currently reside in Costa Rica.

I was there during the initial invasion and stayed up until Operation Phantom Fury in Fallujah. If we were there to bring peace love and understanding, I'd like to know why my unit (1st Marine Division) was given the order to make a bee line for the Kurdish oil fields in the north after the fall of Baghdad and not stay to keep it from being pillaged back to the middle ages.

I have been given alot of time to contemplate the current conga dance into fascism my country seems to be locked into. America has become an entity akin to a lovable neighborhood mutt who once saved kids in wells, but is now rabid and trained to kill by a crackhead. Those of us left who are aware of the rest of the world outside the television bubble are afraid and embarrassed.

So this "America-centricity" you speak of exists, I can verify it firsthand. But you are selling us short if you assume that there aren't people like me who are railing against this with everything they have. Even if it's just with our words.

Merlyn Trey Hunter
http://righteous-dissent.blogspot.com/

From the article “In my 60s counter-culture-influenced youth, I held a romantic torch for communism - not the Soviet totalitarian version, but a simplistic cartoonish brand of self-customised Marxism.”

It is said, if you are not a socialist at 20, you have not developed a heart but if you are not a conservative by 25, you have not developed a brain.

“Further, he claims that many other former East Germans are disillusioned with the reality of their deliverance from Marxist evil. These are people who have lived under both systems,”

It is “culture shock”. Nothing new or unique.

I experienced it coming from UK to Australia.
I have no doubt the collapse of USSR and the emergence of a precarious existence in a freer-market system of post communism does involve a hell of a shock.

It may take several generations for East Europeans to fully appreciate the benefits which come with western democracy, they have had 4 generations of governmental oppression to relinquish.

Such reservations come as no surprise and should not be seriously considered as “valid” comparison between the two systems of government.

I think the author is right, he is just an old leftie who has not evolved rationally to understand why the world is not the place of his wayward youth or why socialism is the abysmal failure which deprives people of the difference between living and existing (choice).

He probably empathises with those East Germans, nostalgic for a visit from the Stasi because he has not progressed as far as he thought he could go when young.

Socialism is the great leveler, it popularity evolves around being able to absolve people of their shortcomings by giving them an array of excuses for failure.

Capitalism offers individuals the opportunity to aspire to their full potentialbut with capitalism we see our lives restricted not by the dead hand of government but the limits of our own capabilities.

Many will find it easier to hide from such self realization just as many prefer to sit on the first of Maslow’s levels and never try to aspire.

There are various flavours of democracy, some better than others, and some more suitable than others, however, the alternative of dictatorship is never better.

The US may have lost its way, but there is still a chance that with a new administration, things will change. There is a growing feeling there of their vulnerability and pariah status, and a desire to change.