Is it really our duty to export our political system to regions of the world where it collides with religious dogma? Can it really be sustained organically? Call me nuts but I don't see how Islam and Democracy can stroll along together. Both are forms of political rule. It's precisley why the consitution stipulates the federal government to remain hands off when it comes to religion. We'd been down that road in the past with monarchial regimes in Europe and their duality of rule. Are we kidding ourselves that after centuries of Islam it will be displaced by voter's rights?
2007-07-31 05:01:03 · 13 answers · asked by douglas l 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Absolutely. Some nations may be happy with an absolute monarchy or a dictator, especially after years of strife. Using an example that's closer to my home, I have 10 Indian tribes in my county. Some of those tribes are run by a religious leader. Others have tribal councils that consist of 1 male from each family and no females. That would not be my choice, but I don't have a right to interfere with a traditional form of government just because it's different than my form of government.
2007-07-31 05:27:05 · answer #1 · answered by David M 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I wouldn't say "our" duty. But if you really take a look around the world today, you'll see more and more forceful removal of dictator types. There will be some excuse used to go in. I'm watching Africa with interest. It isn't one country calling the shots. It's more like the free-world collaborating and picking who's next. All people want to live under freedom. You can label it democracy or whatever word you want. Living under a repressive regime is not what people want. And if people experience some sort of freedom, they'll continue to want it. So it's a matter of removing a tyrant and installing someone who supports freedom. Now that the world is much smaller and distance doesn't matter, it's easy to remove a problem and install a solution. Right or wrong doesn't seem to matter anymore. I guess the goal is peace and freedom but I think there is also a real danger when the power brokers themselves become corrupt. What are we to do about it? Nothing that I see. Sit back and enjoy the ride.
2007-07-31 05:22:55 · answer #2 · answered by JohnFromNC 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
The only time a monarchial regime can do good is the leader has to put his or her interests last, and the interests of the people first. This happens but is very rare.
No government should force a citizen to believe in a religion.
No religion should be allowed to expand through the use of force.
2007-07-31 05:30:30 · answer #3 · answered by Darth Vader 6 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Liberty: The situation of being unfastened from administration by using others. Democracy: government wherein the folk carry the ruling capacity, frequently giving it over to representatives whom they opt to make the regulations and run the government. the two at the instant are not neccessarily linked in any respect. A democratically elected government can inflict brutal sorts of opression against the very people who elected it, and a monarchy or different style of government could produce honest and in basic terms management. although they say capacity corrupts, and this is unlikely that leaders with unchecked capacity will stay in basic terms and honest for the duartion of their lives. and whether they do, what approximately people who replace them? Democracy is probable mankind's ultimate risk at a unfastened society, because of the fact if (whilst) the management is corrupted the lots can replace them.
2016-10-08 21:52:17 · answer #4 · answered by bergman 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Democracy cannot be exported -- only imported.
Democracy, whether its pure (polyarchal) form or the representative republic form that we use, depends on the citizens being willing to abide by the decisions of the majority.
We can barely do that here in the US. In countries where there is so much internal strife and dissent, neither side will allow the other to control things. Hence, absent a group consensus and identity, democracy cannot work.
And it can never be forced.
2007-07-31 05:06:22 · answer #5 · answered by coragryph 7 · 6⤊ 1⤋
I Believe we should get back to promoting democracy through example. rebuild our respectability globally, and other countries will follow. We cannot force feed democracy on anyone it will only push them further away. It's not condy's fault but how much respect do you think she get's from the male dominated middle east. They pay her no mind at all. Bring our soldiers home, rebuild and upgrade our military strength, use the military to patrol our borders, and start some respectable dialogue with what few friendly countries we have left.
2007-07-31 05:17:31 · answer #6 · answered by World Peace Now 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
Well, if you really believe we were endowed by our creator with certain inalienable rights, then yes, every human was made to be free, and when confronted with the opportunity to live free of oppression, will take it. Our system of government transcends all others, because it is built on a philosophy that transcends all others.
That doesn't mean we should march in to every country and over throw their government. Be an example of freedom and others will follow.
2007-07-31 05:07:02 · answer #7 · answered by Daniel A: Zionist Pig 3 · 4⤊ 0⤋
I agree that some nations aren't ready for democracy yet.. and I don't understand why we try to speed that process up. But Islam and Democracy can coexist. Pakistan and Turkey are proof of that.. they are (though far from perfect) improving and relatively stable nations.
2007-07-31 05:07:04 · answer #8 · answered by pip 7 · 4⤊ 0⤋
people were saying the same thing about christianity.. but, it has been done. it's RADICAL EXTREMIST islam that is the problem.. islam and democracy can co-exist... it does in the states... those people just need to stop living in back woods ancient times and get with the program.
2007-07-31 05:08:07 · answer #9 · answered by jasonsluck13 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I believe this to be true. Maybe our style of democracy isn't for every country and culture. Trying to force it is wrong. Especially at gun point
2007-07-31 05:08:50 · answer #10 · answered by gone 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋