As I criticized Taiwanese people so much the last days, I want to show, that there was also some quality in discussions of the past:
Rethinking Taiwan's democratization in light of the European experience
--Speech on the occasion of Europe Day 2005
Li-chiun Cheng
National Youth Commission minister
...
http://blog.roodo.com/lccheng/archives/152998.html
Mastodon Verification
1 year ago
Posts
3 comments:
America's Crusade For Democracy
All people of every nation and every state should be allowed to decide for themselves what kind of government they will have, be it a democracy, monarchy, authoritarian regime or a theocracy. For the United States and the other western powers to impose democracy upon other states, or to make critical humanitarian aid contingent upon a state conforming to a democratic form of government, is no different from the crusades of old forcing Christianity upon people of other faiths.
The new faith is now democracy. And "democrats" are just as intolerant of other forms of government as the crusaders were of other religions. America's crusade for democracy is especially problematic given its selective tolerance to certain non-democratic states, such as Saudi Arabia.
While many will argue that democracy protects the civil liberties and the rights of the people, there are many cases where democracies have slaughtered and enslaved there own people. The United States is a classic example.
The human existence is evolving slowly over time. We have finally begun to reach a point where we recognize that all people (not just white people, or rich people, or citizens of certain countries) have certain inalienable rights that should actually be protected (and not just written and talked about but largely ignored in day to day reality).
This recognition is not the sole domain of democracy alone; all forms of government can evolve to recognize the rights of their people. The United States has evolved- from a democracy where only white landowning males could vote, where slavery was legal and genocide was practiced against Native Americans- to where it is today. Surely other forms of government can evolve as well.
Why are we in the west who are supposedly so democratic, the very ones who are so quick to deprive others of the right to chose their own form of government?
'All people of every nation and every state should be allowed to decide for themselves what kind of government they will have, be it a democracy, monarchy, authoritarian regime or a theocracy.'
This implies by definition, that there must first a democracy be installed. Elsewhere, people cannot decide what kind of government they want.
That's not true. History is replete with examples of revolutions against monarchies, autocracies and theocracies in which the people rose up to depose one leader and put a new leader in similar power. Democracy is not the only game in town. It's certainly not the only style of government, nor is it always the most preferred. If the people of a nation state want democracy, they should have it. But if they want a theocracy or a monarchy or whatever, who are we to tell them that have to have a democracy? That's just ignorant and very nondemocratic.
Post a Comment