Democracy universal aspiration:" We all remember the lamentations of the "peace" during the war in Iraq first and then the Italian mission, the idea of \u200b\u200bexporting democracy is a form of colonialism, an attempt to impose a model of social organization in our country who are not interested or prepared to adopt it. Only the naïve gullibility of a Texan warmonger may believe that the brutality War can turn Iraq into a Western-style democracy. And so on jabbering.
Little or no attention was paid to the fact that before the Afghans and Iraqis to risk their lives, would go in droves to vote for the first time in their history. The British weekly The Economist on the eve of the Iraqi elections he foresaw the inevitable failure, because the sign was made on the fingers of an ink that would remain for days, allowing the identification of those who had gone to vote and exposing the violence of terrorists. The prophecy was blatantly denied.
I argued then that the "pacifists" were wrong: democracy is by no means one of the many political systems, is a universal aspiration. Wherever they have the chance people want to somehow express their views on the government of their country. So far the only method that can guarantee is what everyone wants to vote in free elections, that only democracy allows.
What happened in Tunisia, Egypt, Algeria, Yemen, Bahrain and now in Libya is the indisputable proof that even in North Africa, also in the Arab world, humans prefer to decide their own future rather than entrust it to a dictator, no matter whether wild and bloody, or if good-natured and tolerant. Least squares in the slogans of freedom and democracy are the demands of protesters. Unfortunately, not always squares get what they want: the French wanted the freedom and equality, and obtained the Terror, the Russians wanted to get rid of the autocracy of the Czars and Stalin pecked, and it is possible that the demands for freedom and democracy to theocracy end up with the lead: it is what happened in Iran, where the expulsion of the Shah has cost the coming to power of Islamists the world's most bloodthirsty and backward.
Bush was right: democracy is universal aspiration and it is contagious, because it tends to spread to neighboring states. It would be difficult to deny that the events that led to the expulsion of Tunisia Ben Ali did not have a major role in subsequent events in Algeria, Egypt and elsewhere. It was for this reason that Bush was referring to the broader Middle East, was aware that democracy in one country could encourage others to imitate him.
It 's impossible to say what the outcome of the historical upheavals that are shaking the North Africa and beyond, but it seems to me that at least one thing is clear: the pundits who quipped on the thesis of George W. Bush does not seem particularly smart in light of what is happening. It seems equally clear that the "Obamaniaci," the enthusiastic worshipers of the American president would do well to ask whether it was the wise choice of their idol to look at all costs, relations with America's enemies, going so far as to tolerate the systematic violation of human rights. The current occupant of the White House has repeatedly claimed that "America does not presume to know what is best for all", a claim that amounts to a declaration of neutrality between freedom and slavery, dictatorship and democracy, respect for human rights and freedoms personal and violations, and that does not matter much to those who have the good fortune to live in a free and democratic country but it can make a difference elsewhere. Finally, as if it were not enough, have hastened to give Mubarak has taught us all what it's worth the alliance with the United States.
I hope, as I believe all sensible people, that the events today's prelude to the spread of democracy and its values \u200b\u200bof freedom, tolerance and separation between religion and politics, and it is possible that, at least in some countries, our wish is fulfilled. Whatever happens, however, the most urgent change for us is that the American president, will decide how long the current foreign policy of the United States, the world will be safe.
Antonio Martino, February 22, 2011
0 comments:
Post a Comment