[lit-ideas] Re: FW: Re: Blind Leading the Not-so Blind
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Sat, 21 Jan 2006 14:41:51 -0800
Irene: You are making assumptions similar to those of Harold Pinter, namely
that the U.S. is implacable and inexorable. We are somehow single-minded
and do not change. I don't know how you can hold this view. I have studied
political history and foreign affairs for a long time and there is no
single-mindedness in American politics. The only thing you can count on is
that nothing can be counted on. Our policies during the Cold War are not
our present polices.
The idea of spreading Democracy began (in recent times perhaps) with Bill
Clinton in the Balkans. I recall one of Bush Jrs planks opposed this
Clintonian predilection: We will not engage in nation building, Bush Jr
promised. It is clear (to some of us - not Harold Pinter) that Bush Jr had
no intention of spreading Democracy to Afghanistan and Iraq when he took
office. But after the 9/11 attack, new policy was needed. If we were
going to depose regimes in Afghanistan and Iraq (deemed necessary in our war
against Terror), what were we going to replace them with? I can recall
reading fairly persuasive arguments that we ought to replace them with
benign dictatorships. But Bush is truer to our Liberal-Democratic tradition
in replacing them with democracies.
Will the democracies in Afghanistan and Iraq succeed? They are not failing
as quickly as Bush's detractors predicted, but it is too soon to tell. I
think we should do everything in our power to facilitate success, but beyond
that, it is too soon to tell. It took many years for Japan to become a
successful democracy. Perhaps it will take as long in Iraq.
I don't think much of the argument that Iraqis and Afghans aren't suited to
Democracy and freedom. As someone pointed out to me off line, this argument
is very like the one used against freeing the slaves in the South.
Lawrence
_____
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Saturday, January 21, 2006 2:06 PM
To: lit-ideas
Subject: [lit-ideas] FW: Re: Blind Leading the Not-so Blind
You might try reading A Continent for the Taking, Howard W. French. The
book is on Africa and how the U.S. not only doesn't give a hoot about
democracy there, but we actually *support* strong arm thug dictators as long
as they deliver the goods. He's writing specifically about Africa, however,
Saddam was our puppet until he stopped delivering; likewise the Shah was our
puppet. This baloney called spreading democracy in Iraq is just a conjuring
up of boogie men to make excuses for our thuggery. I'll admit there might
be something to Islamism, but they're a problem only if we're weak and
holding out our hats looking for loans to keep up afloat. We are our enemy,
Lawrence, not Islamism. If we spent the tiniest fraction on shoring up
ourselves, the Islamists wouldn't stand a chance. Instead we empower bogey
men. I might remind you that China doesn't have a problem buddying up to
Africa and South America and their oil.
Other related posts:
