Democracy still Best Global Security Strategy, but much Misunderstood

“Who needs history when you can control public language and debate?”
      –George Orwell

LEFT UNATTENDED, power-mongering, greed, religious/ideological fascism, supremacist hatred, and deviant cruelty will expand… “Good vs. Evil” is mankind’s perpetual struggle – a struggle we must not shirk from, because as Edmund Burke recognized centuries ago, “Evil thrives whenever good people do nothing.” 

Ultimately, what we’re after is global security – a world community of cooperative, non-threatening nations and transnational groups who respect their neighbors. To get there, we should choose strategies that provide us with the most long-term global security for the least costs.

Military approaches can certainly extract cooperation from uncooperative foes; but their results don’t last… As Abraham Lincoln noted, "Force is all conquering, but its victories are short-lived." Better then, wherever possible, to implement strategies that engender permanent respectfulness and tolerance in the world’s miscreants. Notwithstanding some recent miscalculations, planting democracy wherever it can grow is still the solution of choice for maximizing long-term global security. Former international belligerents France, Germany, Italy, Japan, and (potentially) Iraq, are some of Democracy’s most famous “poster children.”

Democracy pacifies countries because it’s inextricably linked to the tenets of universal human rights and equality. And it’s the viability of these essential links that ultimately determines whether democracy takes root and grows. By understanding what sustains democracy and what poisons it we can save ourselves a lot of wasted effort.

It’s NOT Primarily about Elections

“Freedom of the Press is not just important to democracy…it is democracy.”
     –Walter Cronkite

Prior to the Enlightenment (1650-1800), kings ruled by Divine Right – their wealth and power were “proof” of God’s approval. There was a certain hierarchy of things, and most people were vulnerable to various degrees of exploitation. But kings couldn’t risk losing the support of their noblemen, so they typically found enough “graciousness” within themselves to grant them a smattering of individual rights such as the right to trial by a jury of one’s peers.

Then the Enlightenment brought forth the conditions that the world’s first major liberal democracy needed to flourish. It helped Americans realize that their rights and liberties came from their Creator (not from some king); and it also convinced America’s Founding Fathers that freedom of conscience was God's will, which in turn inspired them to create governments that were strictly neutral on matters of religion.

Successful democracies have one critical component upon which all of their other components are built…and it’s NOT “free and fair elections.” Democracy’s foundation, rather, is the institutionalized protection of dissent. Without this protection, democracy diminishes to “Mobocracy” – two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for dinner….

We “institutionalize” the protection of dissent by codifying into permanent law a plethora of (wonderful) rights and freedoms:  the freedoms of speech and press; freedom of assembly; the consent of the governed; freedom to petition government; voting rights; the Rule of Law; rights to due process and legal defense; freedom of one’s own religion AND freedom from another’s religion; and the right to self-protection and property rights, including freedom from unreasonable searches and seizures. 

These protections are Democracy’s “cake”… Elections are its “icing.” If citizens can glean truths and advocate for themselves, then who’s in charge actually matters remarkably little. As Thomas Jefferson once observed, “Where the press is free, and every man can read, all is safe.” In fact, we could pick our government officials randomly, out of the phone book, and likely do just fine – maybe even better!  Jefferson made a similar point when he remarked, “If I had to choose between government without newspapers, and newspapers without government, I wouldn't hesitate to choose the latter.”

Egypt’s Future

Recently, Egypt’s ruling Muslim Brotherhood Party attempted to use democracy as a means of establishing an Islamic theocracy. They treated Egypt’s historic 2012 Presidential Election as a winner-take-all proposition with no need to make post-election compromises, submit to checks and balances, or cooperate with losing factions.

Eventually, President Morsi’s growing disregard for Egypt’s legislature and judiciary became a de facto coup against his own government, sparking the largest national protests that Egypt had ever seen. Then, the Egyptian Army ousted him from office – a counter-coup that may have put Egypt back on a path to democracy...

And if democracy is what Egyptians decide they want, then here’s a recipe that their generals should follow to create it:  Foster the growth of political parties, strengthen parliamentary powers, train and stand behind an independent judiciary, boost free speech, establish a free press, encourage people to form whatever peaceful associations they wish, and administer local elections, all the while explaining and teaching the precepts of democracy, liberty, and freedom to Egypt’s citizens. After all of this is done – in perhaps four or five years – hold a free and fair presidential election for a much diminished office.

Democracy : Islamism :: Water : Gasoline

“Muslims are taught not to compromise their religion to the whims and desires of disbelievers in order to get along with them… The religion of Islam was brought to prevail over all…not to be co-equal…and certainly not to be subservient.”
     –Islamist Fort Hood Murderer Nidal Hasan

Islamism is a despicable supremacist movement. It’s a combination of religion on steroids and secular dictatorship on cocaine. Islamism leverages intolerant passages from the Koran to super-charge a global political agenda aimed at regaining control of former Muslim-controlled lands and re-instituting Shariah Law exactly as it was applied back in the seventh century... It’s every bit as pernicious as Adolf Hitler’s murderous drive to create the “Third Reich,” a murderous psychopath’s utopia where brutal Nazi zealots with “superior” Aryan blood would systematically “purify” their ever-expanding empire.

About 10% of the world’s approximately 1.6 billion Muslims are Islamists. That’s roughly 160 million people! And as it turns out, they’re NOT “yearning to be free.” They're actually just yearning to please Allah – "the Most Gracious and Most Merciful"– and, by securing His graces, secure themselves an amenable Eternity. 

Convicted Fort Hood mass murderer and unapologetic Islamist Nidal Hassan explained things quite clearly in a letter he sent to Fox News weeks before his conviction:  “There can be many commonalities between Islamic governance and governance by American-style democracy. However, there is an inherent and irreconcilable conflict… In an American democracy, “we the people” govern according to what “we the people” think is right or wrong, even if it specifically goes against what All-Mighty God commands.”  [Think women’s rights, gay rights, child protections, separation of church and state, and the freedoms of speech and conscience.]

Put simply, democracy will fail wherever supremacist ideals are given quarter. Attempting to compromise with Islamists is an utter waste of time and resources, which means it’s up to the Islamists’ fellow citizens to either disempower them or forego the benefits of democracy in their countries.

Germans know this firsthand. They live in one of the freest nations in the world; but they prohibit all forms of “propagandistic endorsement" of Nazism, because supremacist “hate speech” weakens Democracy’s essential links to universal human rights and equality.

Islamism and Democracy don’t mix. So when it comes to Islamists, we’ll have to achieve global security by other means….