Democracy in the Middle East

[FlashDangerpants]

Islam would have to do it the hard way, and that means circumnavigating the ideological minefield of religion, tribalism and sectarianism. Political parties tend to reflect Shia, Sunni, Allawhite, Waabism, Bedouin, and any number of other identities.

So, like Northern Ireland then?

[Arising_uk]

Hobbes' Choice,

Democracy's intent is to create open, secular, pluralistic societies. ...

Since when?

[Hobbes' Choice]

Islam would have to do it the hard way, and that means circumnavigating the ideological minefield of religion, tribalism and sectarianism. Political parties tend to reflect Shia, Sunni, Allawhite, Waabism, Bedouin, and any number of other identities.

So, like Northern Ireland then?

Somewhat. And as you know NI is still far from easy. After 30 years of killing by two aggressive and vociferous minorities the peace is still in the balance, despite the vast majority of Northern Irelanders being peaceful.

[attofishpi]

I remember the video footage of the streets of Syria being filled with decent people wanting democratic change. Then Assad had snipers on the tops of buildings taking out the innocents before deciding to literally bomb the shit out of them. Then eventually the likes of the US and UK wanted to have a military intervention to remove Assad, but Russia and China vetoed any chance of an intervention in the UN council.
Russia - scum China scum...now look at where things are.

The media are playing you well.

Oh, you are one of those...its all a conspiracy is it? Thousands of people filled the streets with much of the footage first hand from their mobile phones, peacefully marching as one, or was it all Western medias CGI?

[Hobbes' Choice]

I remember the video footage of the streets of Syria being filled with decent people wanting democratic change. Then Assad had snipers on the tops of buildings taking out the innocents before deciding to literally bomb the shit out of them. Then eventually the likes of the US and UK wanted to have a military intervention to remove Assad, but Russia and China vetoed any chance of an intervention in the UN council.
Russia - scum China scum...now look at where things are.

The media are playing you well.

Oh, you are one of those...its all a conspiracy is it? Thousands of people filled the streets with much of the footage first hand from their mobile phones, peacefully marching as one, or was it all Western medias CGI?

A tiny minority of middle class, educated in the west, foreign NGO funded democracy groups, not relevant to the wider problems of the Syrian nascent political structures that exist.
It was always the intention of Assad to move his country towards democracy, but give him some credit for knowing the local context, and how, like Egypt, democracy led to a radical Muslim Brotherhood, would have led to the same situation in Syria.
It's nothing to do with a conspiracy in the way you mean. But it is true that the west is constantly encouraging destabilising elements in most ME countries.

So where are they now, this progressive, peaceful democracy movement? They just don't exist in any numbers.

[spike]

Some people are quite naive about democracy.

Democracy does require an openness where people are free to criticizes, speak freely and exchange ideas. And those that are naive about it tend to think that democracy is just about voting, like the vote that brought Hitler to power in Germany and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. If democracy really existed in those countries Hitler nor the Brotherhood would have been able to do what they did. Real democracies would have the democratic institutions in place to prevent such people from becoming tyrants. Also, real democracy requires a separation of powers, for instance, the judiciary separate from the legislative. Hitler and the Brotherhood controlled both and thus had excessive powers way beyond the principles of democracy.

The 'Arab Spring' failed in Egypt because the democratic institutions to back it and the will of the people didn't exist. To build such institutions it takes generations, as it did to build democracy in the West. Democracy is also a cultural thing. It's in our DNA so to speak. The Middle East does not yet have the DNA or culture to practice true democracy. We in the West breath it and are generally unconscious of its practice.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Some people are quite naive about democracy.

Democracy does require an openness where people are free to criticizes, speak freely and exchange ideas. And those that are naive about it tend to think that democracy is just about voting, like the vote that brought Hitler to power in Germany and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. If democracy really existed in those countries Hitler nor the Brotherhood would have been able to do what they did. Real democracies would have the democratic institutions in place to prevent such people from becoming tyrants. Also, real democracy requires a separation of powers, for instance, the judiciary separate from the legislative. Hitler and the Brotherhood controlled both and thus had excessive powers way beyond the principles of democracy.

The 'Arab Spring' failed in Egypt because the democratic institutions to back it and the will of the people didn't exist. To build such institutions it takes generations, as it did to build democracy in the West. Democracy is also a cultural thing. It's in our DNA so to speak. The Middle East does not yet have the DNA or culture to practice true democracy. We in the West breath it and are generally unconscious of its practice.

In other words - exactly what I said:

You have things backwards. Democracy has no intent, it is a consequence. It is a consequence of the tendancy of people to accept openness, secularism and pluralism. And can only thrive in those circumstances.
You cannot impose democracy and expect openness and pluralism to be the result.
That is why the American neo-con project is misconceived and has failed in several instances. Not only does the US seem to want to impose democracy, but democracy which has reached the result, not of the people's choice, but one acceptable to the USA.

Germany did have a healthy democracy, but as is always the case a choice can always lead to a situation that brings about the end of democracy. The establishment, fearing a left-wing popular movement, misjudged Hitler, whom they thought they could control, making him Chancellor.

In Egypt the choice that was freely made by the people was not liked by the minority Middle class the their friends in the West, and since the Egyptian army was taking £3 billion from the US, they did the US's bidding and brought about an end to the duly elected Muslim Brotherhood.
Just like the CIA had Salvadore Allende assassinated on 9/11 1973, and brought about the dictatorship of General Pinochet.

Democracy's end is always just one election away.

[spike]

Democracy's end is always just one election away

.

I consider that a silly statement.

[Hobbes' Choice]

Democracy's end is always just one election away

.

I consider that a silly statement.

Take it up with Aristotle.

[spike]

Democracy's end is always just one election away

.

I consider that a silly statement.

Take it up with Aristotle.

What would an ancient like Aristotle know about modern democracy, its requirements and how it works?

[attofishpi]

It was always the intention of Assad to move his country towards democracy, but give him some credit for knowing the local context, and how, like Egypt, democracy led to a radical Muslim Brotherhood, would have led to the same situation in Syria.

You are a sad case for Assad, the most vile virus on the planet that will be ported to a nasty life. He wanted to move Syria to democracy? C'mon Hobbes you're not an Alex Jones twat are you?

[Hobbes' Choice]

What would an ancient like Aristotle know about modern democracy, its requirements and how it works?

He noted that it only takes one vote to vote in a tyrant. And that has happened on several occasions.
For example the USA has been led by the same sort of stereotypical plutocrat for 50 years.

[Hobbes' Choice]

It was always the intention of Assad to move his country towards democracy, but give him some credit for knowing the local context, and how, like Egypt, democracy led to a radical Muslim Brotherhood, would have led to the same situation in Syria.

You are a sad case for Assad, the most vile virus on the planet that will be ported to a nasty life. He wanted to move Syria to democracy? C'mon Hobbes you're not an Alex Jones twat are you?

I don't know who Alex Jones is.
But so much is factual. Faced with the Real Politique however meant he did not follow through on his promise. And the situation in Syria with the rise of Islamic fundamentalist is exactly why he never did.

[attofishpi]

It was always the intention of Assad to move his country towards democracy, but give him some credit for knowing the local context, and how, like Egypt, democracy led to a radical Muslim Brotherhood, would have led to the same situation in Syria.

You are a sad case for Assad, the most vile virus on the planet that will be ported to a nasty life. He wanted to move Syria to democracy? C'mon Hobbes you're not an Alex Jones twat are you?

I don't know who Alex Jones is.
But so much is factual. Faced with the Real Politique however meant he did not follow through on his promise. And the situation in Syria with the rise of Islamic fundamentalist is exactly why he never did.

Was bombing the legs off little children still part of the promise he was too weak to follow through with?

[Hobbes' Choice]

You are a sad case for Assad, the most vile virus on the planet that will be ported to a nasty life. He wanted to move Syria to democracy? C'mon Hobbes you're not an Alex Jones twat are you?

I don't know who Alex Jones is.
But so much is factual. Faced with the Real Politique however meant he did not follow through on his promise. And the situation in Syria with the rise of Islamic fundamentalist is exactly why he never did.

Was bombing the legs off little children still part of the promise he was too weak to follow through with?

Are you talking about the USA, the UK, Australia or France? Or was that the legitimate leader of Syria caught between the international ambitions of Nato and Russia?
What's the fucking difference if a child has lost its legs because of a Syrian bomb or because of an Australian one?