Monday, November 15, 2004

Global crises of democracy
USA wants to "spread out" democracy. Europeans say the same thing, but suggest different methods. To put it very roughly, it could be said that two methods are in the debate:
  1. Drive dictators out of power by using force and sanctions (USA).
  2. Use sanctions, political pressure and discussions and hope that the dictators go away (Europe).
To say it short - I dislike both methods.

What rigth has one state (or groupe of states) to impose policies upon others? Did the UN, for example, have any right to interfere with Saddam Husseins Kurdish-massacres by limiting trade to Iraq? Does the UN have any right to interfere with Sudan, where millions of people are potentially being wiped off the face of the planet? Do Americans and Europeans have any right to pressure the communists in China to lay a little of their un-humane treatment of their own subjects?

Its a complicated matter. If Gaddafi, Castro and other brutal, facist/socialist dictators are allowed to participate in the society of free nations, isn't some kind of recognition of their power to torture and oppress innocent civilians? I would say yes. However, by blocking out dictator-ruled states from the global venue I think bad becomes worse. As an example: Communist Cuba. However, by doing nothing, bad might become better. As an example: Communist China.

China is big and powerful, and has been as long as anyone can remember. Americans have never dared to threaten China in any serious way, knowing that the Chinese could fight back and even shoot weapons of mass destruction at anyone who moves a muscle. Still China is ruled by commnuists, just like Iraq was ruled by a facist, Cuba is by a socialist, and North-Korea is by a maniac. Chinas force has enabled it to be left alone under communistic rule for decades, and allowed it to trade with other nations in the global market, although Chinese human-rights are in the dumpster.

The results of this tolerance towards socialism? Fantastic!

  • China has entered the WTO, thereby admitting that globaliztion and capitalism are the path for the future.
  • Private property rights have found their way into Chinas political structure.
  • A middle-class is forming in China, and fast! Free trade formed a middle-class in Europe a couple of hundred years ago, and that middle-class gradually demanded more and more rights and self-control from their kings and queens. The same is happening in China. A middle-class in China will undermine the communists (and hopefully peacefully).
This short list is probably a lot longer in reality. By simply doing nothing about the brutal dictatorship of Chinese communists, the global market has created a foundation on which a peaceful overturn of socialism can take place.

But the moral question is still remaining: How can we just sit back and watch dictators slaughter their subjects, and do nothing about it? Can we allow another Saddam Hussein to tramp on the UN for 10 years while he slowly wipes out the enemies of his state? Can we watch while the communists of North-Korea slowly starve their subjects to death? Can we hear news about the genocides in Darfur without feeling the need for action (American or European-style above-mentioned)?

Those questions I cannot answer. But I know what patience does in the long run, if its followed up with abundance of free trade. Something to think about, or what?

No comments: