» posted on Monday, October 9th, 2006 at 6:01 pm by Andy D
Book Review: The Case for Democracy
From time to time I will post a message about a book I am reading or have read. I felt I would be doing a disservice if I didn’t start with a book I read earlier this year. I believe anyone who is even the slightest bit interested in foreign policy, the war in Iraq, or a lasting peace between Israel and Palestine should read The Case for Democracy : The Power of Freedom to Overcome Tyranny & Terror by Natan Sharansky and Ron Dermer. I read it and thought it was simply an incredible book. Mr. Sharansky was a political prisoner in the Soviet Union during the 1980’s and, after being released, emigrated to Israel and spent nine years as a politician in a political party he helped to found.
Mr. Sharansky argues that it is in the best interest of the United States to promote democracy wherever it can. Many today claim that democracy can’t work in the Middle East. Some go so far as to state that Muslims don’t want democracy; that it is incompatible with Islam. Mr. Sharansky notes that critics used these same arguments in the ’40’s against democracy in Germany or Japan, and again in the ‘80’s against a democratic Russia. No one wants to live in fear.
Democracies don’t go to war with each other. Mr. Sharansky points out that at no time in history have any true democracies gone to war with each other. The constituents of a democracy only allow war as a last resort, and because of that, they don’t go to war with other democracies.
Regardless of how you feel about the current administrations decisions in Iraq, Afghanistan, or in the Middle East, reading The Case for Democracy will definitely give anyone insight into some of the reasons why those decisions have been made.
Political Friends Blog | A Free Society? said:
Aug 15, 10 at 9:48 pm[...] ago I read Natan Sharansky’s The Case for Democracy. I was something of a political junkie before I read this book, but it really struck a chord with [...]
Gerrit said:
Dec 02, 11 at 3:02 pmNot only should countries not just invade each other for any purpose but self-defense, but definitely no other nation should invade a country for the sake of forcing their own political system upon another nation. It is not the duty of the US, the EU or any country to go to the Middle East and enforce our systems upon people who are either not wanting it or are not ready for full democracy yet. To state that democracy should be spread comes down to a feeling of superiority which would justify enforcing one system on a country that uses another political system. That should never be tolerated. And Israel (as much as I like the place and its people, I even study Hebrew in the hope to relocate there someday) is not in the position to make any statements about defending human rights or peace.
Last but not least, not every country supports the form of democracy that is generally intended when the word is used. Moreover, not every person in democratic countries supports the system. Democracy is often used in political debates very easily to try to strengthen one’s opinion, without even fully explaining what that democracy would be like exactly. For example some anarchist movements, some nationalist movements, and some parties both on the far left and far right all waive the banner “democracy” as if it is the next best thing since sliced bread. Parties with very different ideologies and backgrounds all claiming to want democracy. Probably all having a different idea of what that democracy would actually come down to in practise. Nowadays we’ve come this far that criticising democracy is almost illegal (figure of speach) even when people calling for democracy often are vague in what they want in practise and even when we see democratic nations collapsing one after another.
Let each nation decide their own system, never enforce your system upon another nation. Because in the end, how would the average western nation’s population feel if North Korea or Saudi Arabia suddenly tried to enforce their state structure? Vice versa doesn’t make it right just because of the word “democracy” for whatever that means (because different self-proclaimed democratic nations have very different ways of functioning in practise)