Time to 'impose' democracy/democracy with training wheels?

B

Betsy Og

Registered User
Messages
447
How to fix Syria, or pretty much the entire continent of Africa. Religious fanaticism, tribalism etc., is it culturally arrogant to think these places are a few hundred years behind the rest of us and its time to let the light in?

Syria is presented as lunatic ISIS or evil Assad - does it have to be either/or?, while I gather democracy has no history in the Middle East (and I know western democracies are far from perfect but they're light years ahead of what's out there), should we give Syria a constitution enshrining basic human rights (one person one vote, equality of women etc), freedom of religion, separation of church & state, decent education & healthcare, a transparent & fair justice system (& yes wags, we'd like them ourselves first...). Give them a political model that could work - probably some sort of powersharing between various factions. You might say who are we to tell them what they should have, or isnt this just failed imperialism all over again??, but I think its clear that leaving to their own devices doesnt work either, and their problems find their way to Europe.

Think of it as democratic government with training wheels, an ever-present troika if you will. Would take a heavy UN presence to keep the peace of course, but its more Marshall Plan than send them back to the stone age. The idealistic thought would be that if people lived in peace, without fear of the state, with a fair opportunity for health & happiness, then maybe they wouldn't hate the west (or alternatively risk their life to try to get there). If they could participate in some prosperity there might not be the resentment that some evidently feel. Killing islamic fundamentalism with kindness, if you know what I mean (I'd be all for more direct means of dealing with ISIS it has to be said).

Throughout Africa, the plight of the people not helped by their governments. Must it necessarily be the case that their populations are at the whim of a bad harvest?, or some tribal push? I'm afraid the conclusion is that these nations currently do not have the capability to govern themselves - and if money were no object then, again, I think they would be in a better place if they had a managed democratic government. I know 'imposed' democracy or managed democracy are contradictions, but in western situations you know the majority in parliment will not vote to slaughter the minority - in Africa you just wouldn't know......
 
Be careful, that sounds a lot like The White man's Burden, written by that charming man, that arch hypocrite, that notable imperialist and racist, Rudyard Kipling;

Take up the White Man's burden, Send forth the best ye breed
Go bind your sons to exile, to serve your captives' need;
To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild—
Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child.

Take up the White Man's burden, In patience to abide,
To veil the threat of terror And check the show of pride;
By open speech and simple, An hundred times made plain
To seek another's profit, And work another's gain.

Take up the White Man's burden, The savage wars of peace—
Fill full the mouth of Famine And bid the sickness cease;
And when your goal is nearest The end for others sought,
Watch sloth and heathen Folly Bring all your hopes to nought.

Take up the White Man's burden, No tawdry rule of kings,
But toil of serf and sweeper, The tale of common things.
The ports ye shall not enter, The roads ye shall not tread,
Go mark them with your living, And mark them with your dead.

Take up the White Man's burden And reap his old reward:
The blame of those ye better, The hate of those ye guard—
The cry of hosts ye humour (Ah, slowly!) toward the light:—
"Why brought he us from bondage, Our loved Egyptian night?"

Take up the White Man's burden, Ye dare not stoop to less—
Nor call too loud on Freedom To cloke your weariness;
By all ye cry or whisper, By all ye leave or do,
The silent, sullen peoples Shall weigh your gods and you.

Take up the White Man's burden, Have done with childish days—
The lightly proferred laurel, The easy, ungrudged praise.
Comes now, to search your manhood, through all the thankless years
Cold, edged with dear-bought wisdom, The judgment of your peers!
 
Betsy Og said:
How to fix Syria, ... should we give Syria a constitution enshrining basic human rights (one person one vote, equality of women etc), freedom of religion, separation of church & state, decent education & healthcare, a transparent & fair justice system (& yes wags, we'd like them ourselves first...).
Click to expand...

All of these things plus a number of others were developed slowly and with much pain in Europe. Wars of religion, the long struggle to expand the franchise, the suffragette movement, the wars of ideology in the 20th century. The acceptance of the rule of law rather than unfettered exercise of power (Edmund Burke !)

I have no problem in saying and believing that the culture of the Enlightenment is superior to anything else in any part of the world. However it cannot be transplanted the people of the middle East will have to learn this for themselves.

My fear is that people fleeing war and poverty will bring a culture with them that endangers our cultural achievements. They come from a background that does not recognise women's rights in the public sphere, that has no idea of gay rights, that does not believe in, and probably has never experienced the rule of law.
 
It took us 400 years, two world wars, numerous local wars, a genocide locally and the enslavement of vast tracts of the developing world, which included a few more genocides, to get to where we are now.
By comparison the Middle East is doing rather well.

ISIS are unique in the region in the modern age. The last time a group of a comparably fundamentalist and bloodthirsty nature swept through the region it was 1096 and they came from Europe. For fundamentalism and pathological viciousness in absolute terms the First Crusade was far worse but this is 2015, not 1096. One thing has remained constant though; the main victims are the local civilians.
 
Purple said:
It took us 400 years, two world wars, numerous local wars, a genocide locally and the enslavement of vast tracts of the developing world, which included a few more genocides, to get to where we are now.
By comparison the Middle East is doing rather well.
Click to expand...

Three hundred years ago the Middle East was more civilised than Europe, its cities were larger, its public administration far more sophisticated. It had a culture that brought its people peace and prosperity. It lacked many of the attributes that Europe has gained since then but it was well in advance of Europe of the time. It (specifically the Ottoman Empire) had a culture of toleration. It never developed a culture of individual civil rights.

In the intervening 300 years Europe has, with great pain, developed a society that brings previously unimaginable prosperity based on a world view that values the individual. The middle east despite, or perhaps because of, unrivalled natural resources has descended into religious barbarism.
 
cremeegg said:
Three hundred years ago the Middle East was more civilised than Europe, its cities were larger, its public administration far more sophisticated. It had a culture that brought its people peace and prosperity. It lacked many of the attributes that Europe has gained since then but it was well in advance of Europe of the time. It (specifically the Ottoman Empire) had a culture of toleration. It never developed a culture of individual civil rights.

In the intervening 300 years Europe has, with great pain, developed a society that brings previously unimaginable prosperity based on a world view that values the individual. The middle east despite, or perhaps because of, unrivalled natural resources has descended into religious barbarism.
Click to expand...
Agreed. When the Christian fundamentalists drove the moderate, educated and civilised Moors out of Spain it's Jewish population fled to moderate Muslim North Africa. How times change!
 
Reading back over this, I must add that bombing Iraq Syria Palestine is completely unjustified and I can well understand that they do not regards the West as civilised.
 
I have no issue with ISIS being bombed, the quicker they get sent to the caves the better for us all.
 
cremeegg said:
Reading back over this, I must add that bombing Iraq Syria Palestine is completely unjustified and I can well understand that they do not regards the West as civilised.
Click to expand...
I disagree. Invading Iraq was completely unjustified and destabilised the region. ISIS is a product of that action. It should be opposed without remorse. That doesn’t mean it should be opposed without justice though and it doesn’t mean the Christian fundamentalists in the USA should get their way and kills hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Anyone fighting for ISIS is affair game, wherever they may be. Any Irish citizen or resident who goes to Syria or the region to fight for ISIS should not be allowed to come back. ISIS are a real and existential threat to everything post enlightenment civilisation is and we, our civilisation, is superior to their in every way. They are not Islam, they are a nihilist death cult.
 
Yes, going into Iraq was wrong even though Saddam was a war criminal and a Tyrant.
Yes, supporting the overthrow of Ghaddafi was a mistake even though he was a murderous scumbag amongst many other grotesque names I could call him.

But to quote a previous leader of our fair isle, we are where we are. And Isis is part of that.
How do we stop them? And if we do, who comes in their place a few years later.

Surely it's time to look at the big players behind the scene rather than the foot soldiers. I'm no expert but all the commentators I hear/read are saying that rich and connected individuals in Quatar and Saudi Arabia are driving this. So should we go after them in 1 way or another or are they untouchables?
 
Delboy said:
Yes, going into Iraq was wrong even though Saddam was a war criminal and a Tyrant.
Yes, supporting the overthrow of Ghaddafi was a mistake even though he was a murderous scumbag amongst many other grotesque names I could call him.

But to quote a previous leader of our fair isle, we are where we are. And Isis is part of that.
How do we stop them? And if we do, who comes in their place a few years later.

Surely it's time to look at the big players behind the scene rather than the foot soldiers. I'm no expert but all the commentators I hear/read are saying that rich and connected individuals in Quatar and Saudi Arabia are driving this. So should we go after them in 1 way or another or are they untouchables?
Click to expand...

They are not just getting their money from those sources. They have vast cash reserved and make about $1.5 million a day from oil.
 
Delboy said:
Surely it's time to look at the big players behind the scene rather than the foot soldiers. I'm no expert but all the commentators I hear/read are saying that rich and connected individuals in Quatar and Saudi Arabia are driving this. So should we go after them in 1 way or another or are they untouchables?
Click to expand...

ISIS are only as good as their funding...cut this off and they can't do much. They have about 8m people under their control and would need vast sources of income just to hold all this together. Forgetting about the cost of Paris and other attacks to them, they need huge resources to keep growing and if they stop growing they will wither.

Interesting read here about the funding of ISIS and a proposal to stop it.
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/politics/news/a39727/paris-attacks-middle-eastern-oligarchies
 
Purple said:
I disagree. Invading Iraq was completely unjustified and destabilised the region. ISIS is a product of that action. It should be opposed without remorse. That doesn’t mean it should be opposed without justice though and it doesn’t mean the Christian fundamentalists in the USA should get their way and kills hundreds of thousands of innocent people.

Anyone fighting for ISIS is affair game, wherever they may be. Any Irish citizen or resident who goes to Syria or the region to fight for ISIS should not be allowed to come back. ISIS are a real and existential threat to everything post enlightenment civilisation is and we, our civilisation, is superior to their in every way. They are not Islam, they are a nihilist death cult.
Click to expand...

I dont understand the logic behind the bombing. There is no suggestion that an air campaign on its own is going to remove ISIS. Yet no western power is planning to do anything more.

If there was a coherent plan to end the ISIS regime and replace it with something better that had a realistic chance of success, I wouldn't be opposed to a bombing campaign as part of that. However it seems to me that the present situation involves bombing just to be seen to be doing something.

David Cameron proposed in the house of commons in 2013 that the UK bomb one party in the Syria civil war, he now appears to want to bomb a different, opposing side in that same civil war. That is ludicrous.
 
Betsy Og said:
How to fix Syria, or pretty much the entire continent of Africa. Religious fanaticism, tribalism etc., is it culturally arrogant to think these places are a few hundred years behind the rest of us and its time to let the light in?
Click to expand...

This was the original question on this thread. The answer as far as I am concerned, is that we can't "fix Syria" that is something the Syrians and the wider Middle East, will have to do for themselves.

All the West can do is protect ourselves from the fall out and perhaps lend a helping hand to relieve some of the suffering through humanitarian aid.

Our neighbours are getting divorced, we would really like to help them live happily ever after, but in practice there is nothing we can do. Its not really our business, they have to make their own future, so do the people of Syria.
 
cremeegg said:
Our neighbours are getting divorced, we would really like to help them live happily ever after, but in practice there is nothing we can do. Its not really our business, they have to make their own future, so do the people of Syria.
Click to expand...
I’d agree if we hadn’t squatted in our neighbours house, stolen their stuff, smashed the place up, built patricians within the house and told them what rooms to live in, put the bullies in charge and generally tried to run their lives for years. Now we’ve moved out but left the mess behind, including the bullies, and let them know that if we don’t like the changes they make we will smash their windows and might kick in their front door and slap them around again.

Our neighbours aren’t nice people and they ones in charge treat the rest of the family very badly. One of their children is a psychopath and is trying to take over. The choice for the rest of the family is an abuser or a worse abuser. Many of the normal family members want to move in with us. What should we do?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: Leo
In answer to the original question no, we shouldn't.
Democracy is one of the lest things to be put in place. First you need;
A sovereign constitution.
Freedom of speech.
A free press.
An independent judiciary.
An independent police force.
An educated populace who want equality and democracy.
Enough commonality within the population so that minorities do not fear the tyranny of the majority.
All of these things are a prerequisite for democracy otherwise you end up with, at best, government of the people but not for the people. This is the case in much of Africa and, for example, in Russia.
 
Purple, I agree all those things are more pressing but if you don't allow free elections (albeit to a contrived system - Norn Iron anyone) can't you stand accused of introducing another regime - absolute power corrupts absolutely.

A lot of people seems to be saying "let em at it, they'll find out in the long run", given the modern apparatus of war & the mindless zeal of Isis that amounts to widespread slaughter. Can we not do better?

I'd nearly prefer a brief "boots on the ground approach" than arming one faction who turn around and bite you. Brief in terms of drive them out of their territory, weaken then as much as possible (difficult to 100% wipe out) and get out of there.

The 'what next' is the tougher question and why I say 'impose democracy' for want of anything better. Ok you'll have to deal with suicide bombers but give air support to local police/army and once any identifiable target emerges then obliterate it.

Isis have made themselves a visible target, Iraq & Afghan invasions show you can defeat an army (for all the whining over the mistakes of 9/11 I think phase 1 - Afghanistan- worked, at least until another front was opened), but it's hard to then manage it.
 
Betsy Og said:
I'd nearly prefer a brief "boots on the ground approach" than arming one faction who turn around and bite you. Brief in terms of drive them out of their territory, weaken then as much as possible (difficult to 100% wipe out) and get out of there.
Click to expand...

Do you know who you would direct your boots on the ground against.

In August 2013 David Cameron proposed to the House of Commons that the UK bomb the government side in the Syrian civil war. Today he is thinking of proposing to the House of Commons that the UK bomb the Syrian government's main opponent in that civil war.

The West hasn't got a clue about its own approach, never mind any understanding of the issues.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top