“More than two centuries ago, bold and courageous visionaries pledged their lives, their fortunes, and their sacred honor in signing the Declaration of Independence. Guided by ancient and eternal truths, our forefathers proclaimed to the world that liberty was the natural right of all mankind …. It was the desire for freedom that inspired our Founding Fathers, and it is the belief in the universality of freedom that guides our Nation,” President Bush says in his 2008 Independence Day greeting.
The success of the United States’ great experiment has been and continues to be inspirational to many, but there’s an argument to be made that its success hinged as much on rich natural resources and relative isolation as on its “bold and courageous visionaries.” Setting aside the question of whether the U.S. version of democracy can be replicated elsewhere, what can or should the United States be doing to encourage democracy around the world?
Christopher Coyne, writing in the January February 2008 Cato Policy Report advocates “a principled position of nonintervention and free trade.” Drawing on those same forefathers cited by Bush, Coyne says, “If you go back to the Founding Fathers of America – George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams – all of them enunciated a position of economic ties with all and political ties with none.”
In the same article, Tamara Cofman Wittes suggests an alternative approach to nonintervention, “a menu of tools” that include “advice and training for political activists and political leaders; networking among human rights activists and political entrepreneurs; technical training for governments and government parties; financial and other forms of support for civic groups that are working to inculcate liberal values in their local environment.”
Separately, in her book Freedom’s Unsteady March, America’s Role in Building Arab Democracy, Wittes writes, “A proper understanding of America’s role and its limits is necessary to transform a comfortable and only-when-convenient idealism into a sustainable and effective policy.”
What are those limits? And what are the most effective tools for advancing liberty worldwide?
Comments (14)
S.Pradeep.Babu aka Pradeep.Sabhapathy
3 July 2008 at 19:08 EDT
Permalink
I have been fortunate to visit USA Twice in the Year 1990, Following My First visit which was incomplete, i did apply & was granted a Multiple Entry Visa by The Consulate General at Madras (now Known as Chennai) for which iam ever thankfull . However when i again applied for visa in the year 1995 just before my previously issued via could expire it was cancelled with a seal stating CANCELLED WIHOUT PREJDUICE. I felt sorry for the both Myself & The Officer who Rejected My application .
All I want is an assurance as to what the World’s Most Responssible and Powerfull Country is Doing about all these Terrorist Threat to our Planet’s Democracy & in what way i May be Able to Help(serve) to spare no effort in stopping Fundamentalist & Rasist Groups who are funding allmost all the terrorist Training camps poping every day please Reply Waiting Eagerly For Your Reply.
Dennis Onyait W
10 July 2008 at 07:20 EDT
Permalink
I still remain taken aback about democracy in the Mugabe Republic(Zimbabwe)………….from Kampala Uganda
The Malaysian
16 July 2008 at 04:21 EDT
Permalink
We are calling all democratic countries
to turn your eyes and ears to our beloved country, Malaysia. Are there the real rule of Law? come and listen to us. even the police forces are turned into a brute political army. Im not saying its happening in Malaysia. You judge!
ashoknarayan pandit
16 July 2008 at 06:01 EDT
Permalink
it is very entresting news. i like it. I hope it will be very progress
Douglas
16 July 2008 at 16:09 EDT
Permalink
Of course the United States must continue to promote democracy abroad. But it must do this in a subtle and intelligent way. Above all, it must be willing to take some risks, and not to support democracy only when the democratic process empowers governments which are to America’s liking.
Thus it must repudiate its past support for coups d’etat against democratically-elected governments, as in Iran and Chile. It must withdraw its active support for Muslim despots, as in Egypt and Saudi Arabia, and be willing to accept the results of elections that bring Islamic-oriented parties to power, provided these parties are not supporters of terrorism.
In short, it must be consistent in its implementation of the Bush Doctrine.
Jean
17 July 2008 at 15:23 EDT
Permalink
Personally I prefer “democracy support” to “democracy promotion”. It may sound like splitting semantic hairs, but the distinction has real roots. Promotion often is seen as cheerleading, propagandizing, or foisting a concept upon people. Support, however, recognizes the very real drive that people nearly everywhere have to govern their own lives, express themselves freely, and make their own political and economic choices. Support of their own initiative toward this outcome is usually most welcome and is an appropriate role that respects the underlying value of self-determination inherent in democracy.
Prateep Pal
27 July 2008 at 07:59 EDT
Permalink
in my mind freedom means freedom from disparity, democracy means the highest weapon of freedom. Abraham Lincon the one of the greatest ever freedom fighter ever produced by the earth. Who risks his countries future to establish the real freedom in America. The chair of U S presidency once cherished by Abraham Lincon, George Washington is the centre of expectation from all the people of earth who loves democracy and want to live in freedom. Its our outmost expectation and trust to that chair.
Wesley
30 July 2008 at 02:49 EDT
Permalink
I have always admired American ideals, and it is very true that a big part of my admiration is that America has not only the resources but also more importantly the moral will to follow through on its ideals; and that to me translates as a blessing of the highest merit. America needs to keep its focus on those ideals and not lean as it is prone now, towards freedom for the sake of freedom. It has faltered in its approach to promoting freedom, principally because of the Cold War; but for those isolationists please observe the immense impact America has had on the world since WW11. The American Dream is in fact a universal human dream, with its founding principles embedded in the heart of every man. Democracy has become a tradition in America somewhat corrupted and distorted because of the complexity of international relations, and very real threats; however the ideal of democracy can even exist within any political ideal provided its principles engender the same principles of freedom; and thus true leadership is revealed; and those elements that are the bane of any society take their rightful place on its edges.
Sie.Kathieravealu
8 August 2008 at 09:35 EDT
Permalink
What is given below is a quotation from an article. It reflects some of my ideas on democracy. Western type democracy is not suitable for the Eastern countries since it is failure in most of the countries. In the West democracy is ‘by the people,for the people and of the people’. But in the East it is ‘by the PARTY , for the PARTY and of the PARTY’, which is not REAL democracy. So we, in the East need a different system of democracy where the individuals’ voice would be heard. The people of the country should be treated as ‘citizens’ of the country rather than as ’subjects’ of the party in power. Since the space is not enough I do not want to detail my concept of ‘real democracy’
. Democracy and Empowered People versus ‘Conditioned’ Democracy
Everyone talks democracy. Unfortunately, democracy at present and everywhere is severely restricted either in terms of understanding or scope. People are forced to keep on expecting and imagining democracy out of the maze of myths and misinterpretations around it and its relations, as many self-proclaimed ‘stakeholders of democracy’ are engaged subtly in ‘programming peoples into conformity to the logic of a system they perceived and desired’ and into ‘sectarian and domesticated dialectics’ of a rightist or a leftist in order to turn them into docile pawns. These stakeholders have in their superficial vows of committing themselves to democracy and human liberation become themselves prisoners of a ‘circle of certainty’ (of their self-centered roadmaps) within which they also imprison reality and the people into old or new variants of a ‘culture of silence‘[1]. Today in our region, the so-called ‘upper social strata’, comprising the ruling and exploiting class and their hangers-ons, hype democracy with many adjectives but few verbs in order to continue their traditional dominance in politics, socio-cultural spheres, and economics by coercing the people to become submissive to the status quo or to a ‘fear of change’ or ‘fear of freedom’. The people are covertly encouraged to become virtually dependent on the system as dummy subjects to fatalism, to obligate hunger, conformism, passivism, consumption, obesity, and even escapism. They are forced into a rat-race - one against the other - in an attempt to eke out their living; or struggle constantly to ascend ‘higher in social strata’, with little understanding of the real nature of content, purposes, context or impacts. For this the exploiting class prescribes many ‘dos and don’ts’ to them for their domestication. They are conditioned to hate politics and to shun participation in it.
Sie.Kathieravealu
10 August 2008 at 18:26 EDT
Permalink
What are those limits? And what are the most effective tools for advancing liberty worldwide?
What I have done in answering he above question is by just taking sentences from above article and another article and rearranging them so as to form the answer. Please pardon me for the liberty taken.
What can or should the United States be doing to encourage democracy around the world?
1. A proper understanding of America’s role and its limits is necessary in building democracies around the world is to transform a comfortable and only-when-convenient idealism into a sustainable and effective policy.”
2. The Founding Fathers of America enunciated a position of economic ties with all and political ties with none. That policy should be strictly adhered.
3. Without directly entering the political scene limit to giving advice and training for political activists and political leaders; networking among human rights activists and political entrepreneurs; technical training for governments and government parties; financial and other forms of support for civic groups that are working to inculcate liberal values in their local environment.
4. The United States can and should do a much better job of getting the right kind of assistance in the right amounts to the right countries to fight poverty, address some of the root causes of state failure, and support democracies around the world.
5. America’s international assistance should be linked to a country’s progress in political and economic reforms. It is an effective way to promote democracy and good governance.
Rajendra_Bisessar
17 August 2008 at 07:50 EDT
Permalink
We seem to be concentrating on the political democracy. Even then this depends on a reasonable level of information. The problem is that 90 percent of the global information transfer is controlled by the super rich. The would allow certain freedom to discuss and criticise but they control the minds of people ideologically.
The important question is what do we do to introduce some reasonable level of economic democracy.
The reality is that within countries the rich is getting richer. With regards countries the rich is also getting richer and over all the poor are getting poorer.
America with 6 percent of the world’s population consumes 25 percent of the worls’s resources.
China’s and India’s development has placed the world in an energy tail spin what would happen if two others were to develop.
The reality is the achievement of success by all is an impossibility. Most are destined by prresent economic structures to the economic garbage heap.
The rich and the poor are two sides of the same coin. The poor is getting poorer so that the rich can get richer.
God knows what those with the surplus oil money are doing with it.
The present economic structure has outlived its ability to facilitate real progress.
Please do not give the answer “but the collapse of the socialist countries proves that there is no alternatives.
Rajendra_Bisessar
17 August 2008 at 08:03 EDT
Permalink
Yes the USA can and must support democracy and that is why it must leave Chavez alone. Pre Chavez has shown that all the wealth generated did not assist the marginalised amounting to 80 percent of the population.
The problem is that the USA does not want democracy but simply pushes it in countries so as to force governments to accept the Washington consensus and liberalise everything to the detriment of the poor countries and the advantage of the rich.
America must allow the people to choose the economic strategy and structure of their own choice.
How can America propote democracy in a real way when it seems that its ” national interests” unperpine all of its actions.
America almost pushed the world into nuclear war because the Soviet wants to place missiles in Cuba. Too close to comfort but they had bases all around Russia and now they want to put missiles next door to Russia.
We the people have to seriously consider the level of control over our minds that have been and is being exercised by the press controlled by five corporations holding 70 percent of the world’s wealth.
Truth is not what approximate to what we know to be true but what can be tested. We have to seriously question what we have accepted as we confront ideas opposite to the ones that we have already internalise.
Unless I guess socialisation is something every one alse has undergone with the exception of “I”.
Naim
25 August 2008 at 20:12 EDT
Permalink
To encourage democracy around the globe U.S should look for alternative ways of doing so, U.S leaders should set example of being servants to society and people needs; telling democracy certainly would not work. Certainly, U.S liberty values are supportive to respect to other people cultural values, but, still there is a lack of communication between U.S cultures and others. Encouraging to value democratic values is more important then making other’s play democracy, kind of “theatrical democracy”.
U.S institutions and organizations should use influencing rather then power. Bringing the question of what is the U. S role in promoting democracy raises the follow question of why U. S promotes democracy? The first question would lead to many answers but at the heart answers none. Before one answers of ‘what” it should think of “why”
As many would argue that is not possible to set global democracy, however, enlarging the democracy is democratic.
a.v.samikkannu
31 August 2008 at 00:15 EDT
Permalink
Laymen like me get very much disgusted and agitaed whenever we happen to see the very people who are killers and maimers of not only their political/ideological enemies[SIC] in such far of places as the Americas, Africas, Arabia and Asia but also the children ,the elderly and the women with their well-crafted weapons of both ecomoic and war-field types- all in the name of [upholding]their own version of democracy which is nothiong but a blanket licence to loot and plunder the natural as well as the human resources of those hapless nations with the help of their stooges set up as the elected representatives of people-indulge in such pontification!
Our humble request is: Uncle Sam, pl. keep your hands off us! We kow how to govern ourselves!