Tuesday, December 13, 2005


An Introduction to Democracy for the Novice
Many utopian minded individuals hope for a world that will invest all of its authority into one political body, the UN. I am sorry to say that there is no way that an unelected body with a weakness against dictatorships and terrorism has any chance of achieving that goal.

The human race is waiting for a more polished version of Democracy to become a global reality. This is a logical evolution for our planet.

I am not advocating the destruction of the UN. It should either become the means of a world Democratic government or it should be replaced by a World Congress, Parliament or Senate. Despite its many flaws, the UN could live on for the time being in order to facilitate communication between the world's governments. However, the UN's inability to maintain the rule of international law will continue as long as it maintains its present form.

Representatives of unelected governments are illegitimate and have no right to participate in such a world body. As long as the UN coddles dictatorships it will never have the moral authority to survive humanity’s evolution into a higher level of civilization.

Something that the opponents of "American domination" do not understand is that Democracy is more powerful than the United States, not the other way around. It is true that the fate of Democracy is intertwined with the USA and some intelligent people fear the power of our country. That is understandable, but this concern is based on sensationalism and irrational fear. The success of US efforts to build Democracy will be the success of the majority of the world’s population.

As an example, Iraq is developing a Democracy that has been largely cultivated by the support of the US and its allies. In the spirit of self-determination it isn't surprising that the government of Iraq is NOT taking shape as a US puppet.

Due to the pressure of the Iraqi Governing Council, a US offensive to take back the insurgent held city of Fallujah was aborted back in April of 2004. Two members of the Council resigned in protest of the American offensive. Even though the US government realized that the Governing Council was making a big mistake, the attack was reluctantly called off. It was more important to maintain our relationship with our new allies than risk alienating them. By the end of the year it was necessary for US troops to go back to Fallujah (this time with the Governing Council's blessing) and take the city. There were no "I told you so's",... just the seeds of Democracy and self-rule at work.

If the protests of the Shiite Grand Ayatollah Al-Sistani didn’t wake you up then nothing will. Al Sistani is the most important Shiite religious leader in Iraq and that means he has a lot of political influence*. He used that influence to push the US into moving up the schedule for establishing an elected Iraqi government and Iraqi-made constitution. The Shiites exercised people power by peacefully marching in the streets to achieve these goals. Clearly, the US listened to the people of Iraq and that is something that is NEVER acknowledged.

The lesson that should be learned from these events is that Democracy is not loyal to the United States, it is loyal to the people who participate in it.

I do not advocate war as a means to achieve Democracy. War should only be used against those fascist dictatorships who wage wars of aggression and commit large scale acts of genocide in the process. However, a civil war against a despotic dictatorship may also deserve military support in the right circumstances. In all other cases, peaceful means should be used on a global scale to liberate countries that are suffering under fascist or totalitarian rule. Many Democratic nations do not have the willpower to accomplish this and that is something that must change.

This commentary is an introduction to an ongoing series of articles that I will be writing to address the advance of Democracy and the resistance that it has faced.

* Footnotes: Some cynics will argue that this is evidence of the lack of separation between religion and state in Iraq, but Al Sistani has vocally and physically rejected Iranian styled Islamist government. This is a very hopeful sign from a region with no history of Democratic government.

Democracy also has a tradition of having religious leaders pursuing political activism, but refraining from political power. Reverend Martin Luther King, Jr. is a fine example of that.


GUYK said...

I personally have no use for a democracy. Democracies generally wind up as tyranies by the majorities--take a look at France and Germany at the moment. A representive constitutional republic-which is what we have in the USA is an unwieldy form of government when comared to a majority rules democracy but it does a hell of a lot better in protecting the rights of the minority-and minority not being a racial or religious minority but the party out of power.

The UN is the epitome of a tyranny by the majority. If not for the veto power of the USA the UN would pass its laws to consfiscate the wealth of the world and redistribute it to the have not countries. This has always been the downfall of democracy. I'll take a constitutional republic anytime over a democracy.

Freedomnow said...

It’s funny that when most people talk about Democracy we are actually talking about a Republic. Real Athens styled Democracy is not possible with the population sizes of modern countries. It has become common usage and I am guilty of it, without the slightest bit of shame.

The 1st French Republic was actually much worse than the UN. They not only seized property but ruthlessly separated the heads from the bodies of the privileged class. For a Constitutional Republic they sure messed things up. I think they qualify as the epitome of the epitome of the tyranny by the majority (that’s a painful sentence but it accomplishes the task I gave it).

Sure the UN is dominated by anti-Semitism, prone to anti-Americanism, corrupted by dictators and fields armed forces that are much more brutal than the US military, but they are not inherently evil. It is just an honest failure.

kuhnkat said...


If you create an organisation, then accept more people into its ranks until about 80% of them are evil, doesn't that make the organisation evil?

I can't quote exact figures, but, based on the resolutions passed in the General Assembly and the Security Council and in virtually every Committee and working group... it is the same.

The bad guys outnumber the good guys in the UN. We MUST get out of it. The only influence we currently have is the power of the dollar. Using the power of the dollar to BUY the result we want is simply reinforcing BAD BEHAVIOR.

Mad Zionist said...

IT is every bit as important to protect the majority from the will of the minority as it is vice-versa. Democracy only works when the loser is willing to abide by the winner's rules.

We have a problem in America now where we have a minority on the left who are imposing their will against the majority on the right. Look at the way Christmas has been co-opted by Kwanza and pagan secularism like Frosty and Rudolph characters despite the fact that the majority in this country believe in Christianity and the idea of it bein a tribute to the birth of Jesus.

This is an opinion coming from a religious JEW, by the way. If there is anything that bothers me most it is when the rights of the few imopose their will against the the majority. This is best evidenced by the Supreme Court ruling on matters like the death penalty or partial birth abortion or gay marriage against the desires of the majority of the people in this country.

Freedomnow said...

The political reality dictates our limitations. The UN is entrenched and there is nothing we can do about it.

We can foster Democracy around the world so that the "bad guys" are thrown out of the UN or the UN marginalizes itself and it is bypassed.

None of which will happen in the near future, so circumstances can still change. I am not attached too closely to just one strategy.

Freedomnow said...


The Left is quite adapt at subverting Democracy. Look at the Russian Revolution for the best example.

People will always be dishonest to advance their agenda. Its a fact of life that we have to deal with it on a case by case basis...

kuhnkat said...


the UN is enttrenched, but, if we pull out our 25% dues, our men and materiel for Peace Keeping missions, our participation and monetary contributons to all the little fascist committees and orgs and... it will have a HUGE difference. Without us there a lot of their aura of Legitimacy will evaporate as the money they pay to the dictators evaporates.

With the UN reduced to a Humbled ineffective shell (it is already ineffective) countries can start looking for a way to organise in a group that will be useful AND support morals and ideals important to us.

Until we "put the stake through the UN's heart" we will be unable to promote a healthy grouping of nations with high ideals that will be looked up to and respected for its ACTIONS, not just its checkbook.

Currently the string of UN failures stretches over most of the globe. Even the Balkans covers a failure to stop the ethnic cleansing in Kosovo and other Muslim majority areas. Everywhere they go they take their corrupt, diseased personnel who spread criminality, immorality, and just plain stupidity.

If anyone has been paying attention the Kyoto protocol has been an unmitigated disaster. Most Western Countries have NOT reduced their greenhouse gas output except the big non-signatore US. Without the US leading it will die and they will blame it on us. Of course, they would have blamed it on us ANYWAY when they didn't meet their goals and we struggled to meet ours.

The UN charter is pure socialism. Sooner or later, if we support it, the UN WILL get its own source of funding. (the Treaty of the Seas is frighteningly close to this) At that point it will no longer need the agreement of the US. It then becomes what the Communists have been working on since its inception, the big Commie that can slap the US down thru sheer mass. It will no longer ASK for cooperation it will force it.

Imagine the US totally sealed off from trade with the rest of the world. We have enough internal resources to deal with this, but, it would stop our growth. It would NOT stop illegal immigration so would be a severe blow to this country while we scrambled to do enough drilling and grow bioenergy to make up some of the slack.

If the commie Dhimmicrats had not blocked our oil, natural gas, and coal development this countries economy would be much healthier and better able to absorb that kind of blow. We are not prepared to stand against the world any time soon. And we will HAVE to if we stay in the UN or accept our role as DHIMMI.

Freedomnow said...

Well, I agree on the end result of what you want to accomplish by dumping the UN, but I disagree on the method.

kuhnkat said...


Freedomnow said...

If you came come up with some good Operation names for the comments in "Another American Victory" I might consider supporting your strategy.