25 March 2009
The Bottom Billion and Democracy
When I read the review of "Wars, Guns, and Votes" by Human Rights Watch's Kenneth Roth in the March 22, 2009 New York Times, I wondered whether it was only he or the author, Professor Paul Collier, as well, who believe that "Western democracies . . . might be expected to demand the real thing" from authoritarian regimes that adopt the charade of democratic elections to legitimize their governments. Is it really the duty of Western democracies to oblige leaders in the "bottom billion" countries to institute genuinely participatory forms of government? It may be morally imperative to stop genocide and harboring outlaws or terrorists by those autocracies. A similar interest in self-respect and, ultimately, self-defense does not justify proselytizing a form of government that only suits a well-educated and generally prosperous society to a nation most of whose citizens barely survive day to day.
Democratic government comes after improvement in living standards, not before. Rather than threats of military intervention to impose "true" democracy, resources should be devoted innovatively to instilling in the populations of the "bottom billion" the education and advancement in material well-being that will lead them to assume control over their own political futures.
When I read the review of "Wars, Guns, and Votes" by Human Rights Watch's Kenneth Roth in the March 22, 2009 New York Times, I wondered whether it was only he or the author, Professor Paul Collier, as well, who believe that "Western democracies . . . might be expected to demand the real thing" from authoritarian regimes that adopt the charade of democratic elections to legitimize their governments. Is it really the duty of Western democracies to oblige leaders in the "bottom billion" countries to institute genuinely participatory forms of government? It may be morally imperative to stop genocide and harboring outlaws or terrorists by those autocracies. A similar interest in self-respect and, ultimately, self-defense does not justify proselytizing a form of government that only suits a well-educated and generally prosperous society to a nation most of whose citizens barely survive day to day.
Democratic government comes after improvement in living standards, not before. Rather than threats of military intervention to impose "true" democracy, resources should be devoted innovatively to instilling in the populations of the "bottom billion" the education and advancement in material well-being that will lead them to assume control over their own political futures.
Comments:
Post a Comment
