In some ways, democracy is an ideological prism through which the bright lights of aspiration, experience and history pass and are refracted into forms as varied as the people of Earth.

This point is richly illustrated in America.gov’s Democracy Video Challenge, which invites the world to complete the phrase “Democracy is ….” From the entries submitted thus far, it’s clear the word evokes a lot of different interpretations. The submissions also underscore that, for many, regardless of the name applied to their current form of government, democracy is more a goal than a fact of daily life.

Some of the entries I found interesting (and I haven’t yet viewed them all) are those submitted from nations furthest removed from democratic government. Take a look at life in Burma presented by the videographer as the antithesis of democracy, or share the Chinese Dream, as it looks back at the events decades ago in Tiananmen Square and ahead to a future in which freedom of expression is the norm.

Some interesting submissions also have come from Iran: Find out what Honey has to do with democracy, or see it boiled down to its most basic element in ER.

More than 100 videos have been submitted to this contest and more are arriving every day. Does one capture your vision of democracy? Take a look and let me hear from you.

In mid-July, America.gov posted a story on the failure of the U.N. Security Council to adopt a resolution condemning and sanctioning members of President Robert Mugabe’s ruling regime in Zimbabwe. The crisis in Zimbabwe continues, and so do comments from our readers. On August 20, one sent this note in response to that article.

“International communities or countries besides China and Russia, which support the governing system of Mugabe, have absolutely little influence for the changing attitude of Mugabe’s governing system, which is based on intimidation, power-centralization in the hand of Mugabe. China and Russia are playing cards with the innocent lives of people for their political and economical benefits. Such games to challenge not only US but also the international communities have been played long though the consequences of this game cost indescribable destruction for a nation, by and large, and a great deal of lives of innocent people.

People can simply understand the move made by China and Russia, yet these both coutries by human hearts and conscience must not embrace and support Mugabe since these both countries are accountable in the sufferings and killing of people under the Mugabe’s governing system.”

Is it possible for the world community to effectively push for improvements in Zimbabwe without cooperation from China and Russia?

“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?