Democracy is a Bitch (Hamas victory)
comments powered by Disqus
Irfan Khawaja - 8/4/2006
As a simple empirical check on this thread: does anyone know where Hanson discusses the relation between democracy and foreign policy? A reference or two or three would help in clearing up whether he is talking about "democracy" per se or "liberal democracy."
David T. Beito - 1/27/2006
Here is what I found with a short search. He almost always uses the term "democracy" rather than "liberal democracy." While he touts the virtues of capitalism, etc., his general approach seems rather vague....as if to assume that elections will have a transformative effect on behavior.
I see no concern in this essay, for example, about the dangers of a tyranny of the majority:
Aeon J. Skoble - 1/27/2006
RAB - Is there some reason you're referring to me with scare quotes? That's my name. If it bothers you, keep it to yourself. You're the visitor here, not me.
As to the substance of your comments:
1, there's no such thing as imposing freedom. A free society is one in which those who would impose lack the power to do so. It's fallacious thinking to characterize overthrowing a tyrant as "imposing liberalism." And in any case, what do you mean by saying that "our masters" want to "impose liberalism"? The US govt didn't play any role that I could detect in the Palestinian elections. My remark to David was simply to note that folks like Hanson aren't, contrary to what David seemed to imply, favoring democracy per se, but liberal democracy.
2, "the distinction between "attacking its neighbours" and "liberating its neighbours from oppression" is...in the eye of the beholder." If the point of this remark is to imply that the destruction of Israel would somehow liberate the people who live there, sorry, that's false. Citizens of Israel, including Arabs, have a far greater level of rights and democratic participation than any other middle-easter nation, and certainly more than they would enjoy under a Palestinian regime. Besides Hamas' goal of killing Jews, they also like torturing and killing gays.
Otto M. Kerner - 1/27/2006
If there's somebody out there taking orders, please make mine a "liberalism", and give me the "democracy" only if it comes free.
Rowan Arthur Berkeley - 1/27/2006
Oh, great, 'Aeon J Skoble', so our masters now want to impose upon us 'liberalism'. Presumably that is why they are known as 'neo-conservatives'.
p.s., again to 'Aeon J Skoble' : the distinction between "attacking its neighbours" and "liberating its neighbours from oppression" is, like a surprisingly large number of things, in the eye of the beholder.
Anthony Gregory - 1/26/2006
Yes, Hamas is at least partly a product of the democratic State of Israel. Yeah, democracy!
Anthony Gregory - 1/26/2006
Also, some democratic peace theorists have characterized Afghanistan after the American invasion and nation-building as a democracy.
Sheldon Richman - 1/26/2006
Incidentally, as UPI reported in 2001, Israel helped nurture Hamas as a religious rival to the secular Fatah. The story is here: http://freerepublic.com/focus/news/708609/posts.
Sheldon Richman - 1/26/2006
Could Hamas's victory had anything to do with Bush's rather heavy-handed support (thanks to us taxpayers) for Fatah? When will they ever learn?
David T. Beito - 1/26/2006
Very often the pro-war side uses the the term "democracy" without qualifiers and celebrates uncritically the machinery of elections, such as the recent depictions of high turnout in Iraq.
Leaving this aside, however, Hanson and company are very inconsistent on this. They have praised democracy in Iraq even though it led to a victory a Shi'ite fundamentalists. These Shi'ites, not to mention the Sunnis and Kurds, are often very critical of liberal ideas including free speech for opponents, equal rights for women. Because the winners are pro-U.S.,their illiberalism is overlooked and rationalized.
Aeon J. Skoble - 1/26/2006
Last I checked, it wasn't democracy, but _liberal_ democracy, that was desired. Hamas may have been democratically elected, as was Hitler, but that's not liberalism. My guess would be that Hanson would have favored going to war against Hitler, despite his democratic "legitimacy", on the grounds that Nazi Germany was literally threatening and in many cases actually attacking its neighbors. Hamas is explicitly dedicated to the eradication of one of its neighbors, so what exactly is the objection to the self-defensive war that seems to entail? The elections are neither here nor there.
- Trump Holds Wide Lead in South Carolina
- An All-or-Nothing Fight for the Supreme Court
- Did Trump Really Lose the Debate?
- Scalia’s Death Sets Off Epic Battle
- Democrats See Gift in GOP Blocking Court Nominee
- Quote of the Day
- The Nastiest GOP Debate
- Reaction to the Republican Debate
- The GOP Presidential Debate
- How Clinton Could Respond on Supreme Court Vacancy
- Trump and Clinton Way Ahead in South Carolina
- McConnell Says Senate Will Wait to Replace Scalia
- Antonin Scalia Is Dead
- Clinton Says Sanders Would Be Threat to Obama Legacy
- Internal Tracker Shows Trump Leading in South Carolina
- Ben Carson used an apparently fake Joseph Stalin quote — and the Internet loved it
- Rubio exaggerates in saying it's been 80 years since a 'lame duck' made a Supreme Court nomination
- Humans Hard-Wired to Teach, Anthropologist Says
- Parents outraged after students shown ‘white guilt’ cartoon for Black History Month
- Maryland is once again considering retiring its state song
- Historian at the center of Sanders-Clinton debate
- James Loewen Says Additional Baltimore Confederate Statues Should be Removed
- NYT History Book Reviews: Who Got Noticed this Week?
- A historian’s advice to students thinking of getting a PhD in a tough economic climate
- German historian Heinz Richter cleared of charges