[lit-ideas] Re: On the prospect of World Peace
- From: "Judith Evans" <judithevans1@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2006 16:54:46 +0100
I'm not sure, Lawrence, that I understand what you mean by
"liberal
democracy", given your post.
But I am sure that your
LH>Germany never met the criteria of a liberal democracy until
after WWII.
LH>No one thinks that they did, by the way.
is a bit bizarre. Cf
Rudolf Heberle _From Democracy to Nazism_ (terrific! but, Richard
Evans
told me, shown to be wrong/atypical -- fyi the "democracy" is not
the
point at issue -- still, most interesting)
http://www.adinfinitumbooks.com/si/14726X1.html
Carl Schmitt (Ellen Kennedy, trans) _Crisis of Parliamentary
Democracy_
http://www.amazon.com/Parliamentary-Democracy-Studies-Contemporary-Thought/dp/0262691264/sr=1-20/qid=1157470815/ref=sr_1_20/102-3951326-1175348?ie=UTF8&s=books
Peter Caldwell and William Scheuerman, eds. _From Liberal
Democracy to Fascism: Legal and Political Thought in the
Weimar Republic_
http://66.249.93.104/search?q=cache:0ZAG4MRKDdYJ:www.h-net.org/reviews/showpdf.cgi%3Fpath%3D81921070568363+Weimar+%2Bliberal+democracy&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=2
etc. etc. etc. etc. etc.
of course there's room for an argument that Weimar wasn't
a "real" liberal democracy, but then, there's even more
room to argue that China isn't.
Judy Evans, Cardiff, UK
----- Original Message -----
From: Lawrence Helm
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 4:10 PM
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: On the prospect of World Peace
Cough, couch, cough, "a beginning?" What are you talking about?
Of course there has been a beginning, a process, war after war
among competing systems, varieties of systems until in 1990 there
remained only two competing major systems; then in 1991 there was
only one, Liberal Democracy. It isn't a matter of taking it
seriously, that is a simple fact. You can't dispute it.
You mentioned China, but China following the lead of Hong Kong is
instituting many of the elements of Liberal Democracy. Can they
retain some control over the government and still reap the
benefits of a free economy? They are trying. They have had to
give up one of the basic elements of a Communist system, i.e., a
state-run economy; so they don't meet the criteria of Communism
any longer. Few consider China the threat they were during the
Cold War.
I don't understand what you are saying about Brazil. They are a
developing liberal democracy. Remember, Liberal Democracies don'
t war with Liberal Democracies.
As to Germany, Democracy was forced upon them after WWI and they
resented it. Even so, it might have caught on had it not been
for the depression. Germany didn't feel they had lost WWI and
they didn't' appreciate a government imposed upon them. They
wanted a great leader to save their country from the people who
"betrayed it." They had major unresolved issues after WWI that
took WWII to resolve. Germany never met the criteria of a
liberal democracy until after WWII. No one thinks that they did,
by the way. There is no one saying that Weimer Germany means
there was one exception to the dictum that Liberal Democracies
don't war with Liberal Democracies. [I suppose I shouldn't be
quite so absolute. There seem to be people who will say the most
absurd and impossible things; so there may be people saying this
as well.]
In the "Last Man" portion of The End of History and the Last Man,
Fukuyama does consider the possibility that there may in the
future "End of History" period arise an individual so charismatic
and so imbued with unrelenting thymos that he will, merely to
avoid the boredom of Nietzsche's "Last Man," engage in some
unique action that will start history all over again, but
Fukuyama seems not to have continued to pursue that possibility
after finishing his book.
Lawrence
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Andy Amago
Sent: Tuesday, September 05, 2006 7:39 AM
To: lit-ideas
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: On the prospect of World Peace
I guess if there's an end of history there has to be a beginning.
History is only in the last 15 some years. That explains a lot
of things but it also begs the question of how anyone can take
this stuff seriously.
Of course there are challengers. What about China with it's
evolving Confucian Capitalistic Communism? They're predicted to
be the superpower by the year 2030. What about Brazil, even
though Brazil's liberal democracy is second or third after Iraq
for hell on earth (my ranking on my personal Hell on Earth
Scale). China is evolving. We don't know how China is going to
shake out. Also, I have personally lived through so many
predictions that never panned out that predicting the end of
history through an ascendency of liberal democracy is down there
with leisure suits and hot pants, a political fashion,
meaningless.
Also, Hitler arose out of the Weimar Republic, a democracy. He
rose through the system. There was no coup. He was elected and
the country then went fascist. I also said with the exception of
Japan, WWII was fought in and among liberal democracies.
Germany's being a liberal democracy didn't stop it from becoming
fascist.
Internal Virus Database is out-of-date.
Checked by AVG Free Edition.
Version: 7.1.405 / Virus Database: 268.11.4/424 - Release Date:
21/08/2006
------------------------------------------------------------------
To change your Lit-Ideas settings (subscribe/unsub, vacation on/off,
digest on/off), visit www.andreas.com/faq-lit-ideas.html
Other related posts:
