Global Tour

Second Life

Dictatorships have gotten good at keeping democracy at bay. It wasn't supposed to be this way.

Newsweek Web Exclusive

Dec 13, 2007 | Updated: 4:49 p.m. ET Dec 13, 2007

« Return to Article

Discuss

Posted By: Distant @ 12/20/2007 12:55:51 PM

Comment: I am sadly reaching the conclusion that there are large segments of the world's populations that are happier living under a dictatorship. America cannot force democracy on any population or group of people. The people themselves must want it.

But they also have to understand that with democracy comes responsibility. Responsibility to put the greater good of the masses over your own personal aggrandizement or wealth accumulation. And that applies to everyone in the democracy, not just the elite or the leadership.

Too many poplulations around the world flirt with democracy, then choose to accept corruption and mismanagement instead of standing up to leaders and demanding accountability.
Posted By: manbearpig @ 12/16/2007 10:37:09 PM

Comment: Why is Russia requiring Western NGOs to register a wrong thing?! Can a Russian NGO operate in the US without registration? For that matter, can a British NGO operate in the US without registration? Why is it that the west assumes it has the moral right to monitor elections in an eastern democracy? Say a group of Eastern monitors want to monitor elections in the US or a Western European country? Would onerous restrictions be put on them? What would have been the reaction here if an eastern bloc wanted to monitor US elections in 2004 because the 2000 elections were perceived to be "rigged"? Putin is a democratically elected head of state, exactly like our President. What gives us the right to term him an autocrat? Just because we don't like him or trust him?
Posted By: jpaol @ 12/16/2007 9:26:15 PM

Comment: Drezner: Can we take this article to mean that you are renouncing your previous support for the the invasion of Iraq by the Bush Administration?
Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/16/2007 2:07:18 AM

Comment: : The Mormon president Ezra Taft Benson (considered a prophet by Mormons) was a fan of the John Birch Society.
The Taft is Heusen???s name is because Ezra Taft Benson is a descendent of Alphonso Taft, who along with one of the Russell family started the Order of the Skull and Bones (legally it has been known as Russell Trust). Remember, that George Bush is a Russel Trust member. Research the
Astor Bundy, Collins, DuPont , Freeman, Kennedy Li Onassis Reynolds Rockefeller Rothschild
Russell Van Duyn families.
"There are many reasons Mormons will not come forth even though they know of the corruption in the Mormon church. One is due to their belief in Mormon scripture which they associate with the Mormon church. The leadership has usurped power and authority over this scripture. Thus, the members of the Mormon church think that God expects them to support their misguided leaders. This is much the - rationalization that many Americans make about our government. They all know of the corruption, but rationalize that it is unpatriotic to talk against the government or ungrateful to complain when they enjoy superficial prosperity."Bush's fraternity now dominates his administration. You will find no matter who is in power, these fraternities are represented by a family member in all administrations.
Posted By: Holly Garfield @ 12/15/2007 8:49:12 AM

Comment: Inroads for democracy are slowly taking place. There will be ups and downs during that time. In the past successfl democracies took massive social unrest to start, and decades to evolve into a fair system. The US had machine politics in Chicago and black voting rights blocked in the south almost 200 years after our revolution. A peaceful democratic change takes time and increased prosperity. China is the only oligarchy I see where the government is business oriented and the uncertainty that is innate in democracy could slow or stop growth. All the rest of the national leaders are more power-holding oriented rather than financial growth oriented. Prosperity, as it slowly comes to much of the world, will allow democracy to evolve peaceably and naturally. This will not happen overnight, or smoothly, but it will happen. Germany, Italy and Japan now have reasonably free elections, and they were doninating strong dictatorships 70 years ago.
Posted By: Corkyfoiles @ 12/14/2007 6:53:18 PM

Comment: I learned early, from a catholic nun who taught civics, THE CHURCH IS NOT A DEMOCRACY!!. I had just assumed anything the church thought was wrong, the constitution thought was wrong too. my bad. But now that bush is in office and we are getting evangelical justice dept, evangelical courts, evangelical legislators, and a huge evangelical electorate, who knows? Maybee our democracy's missionaries, the soldiers, will save these evil people from themselves--or die tryin
Posted By: Radioguy @ 12/14/2007 2:47:34 PM

Comment: Blaming Bush is getting old? Yes, it certainly is, and we only have to wait another 13 months until this disastrous presidency is at an end. In the 'real world' of global politics, democracy has always been a 'dirty word, (read Hitler's comments in 'Mein Kampf;). It's an even dirtier word, today, thanks to George W. Bush.
And, while we're on the subject of things that are 'getting old,' the 'commie-liberal left' comments from the right has gotten quite old.
Posted By: puteryeck @ 12/14/2007 11:29:39 AM

Comment: Thank You GW you are nothing but a pimple on the rectum of the world. You have screwed Americas reputation for generations to come. It's time for a constitutional convention, the system is not working anymore.
Posted By: DemocracyDefender @ 12/14/2007 9:05:43 AM

Comment: Once again, the commie-liberals of the Left, this time one Daniel W. Drezner of Tufts University, blame Bush for the resurgence of dictatorships. By an extension of his tortious logic, perhaps we should have prevented Hitler from committing suicide in his bunker at the end of WWII and put him in charge of West Germany. After all, we weren't supposed to install a democracy in Germany, were we? Nor Japan.

Maybe Drezner can use the same magic which gives him a job at Tufts to reattach Saddam's head, reincarnate him, and put him back in charge in Iraq. Then Czar Validimir Putin will magically disappear in the next Russian Revolution, followed in close order by Robert Mugabe, Hugo Chavez, Evo Morales, Mahmoud Ahmedinejad, Perviz Musharrif, and all the other tinhorn dictators of the planet including the ones running the evil Chicom empire.

Bush is a lousy president, but blaming him for everything from Hurricane Katrina to Putin's power grab is getting kind of old, isn't it?
- Posted By: alxcaphonh @ 12/14/2007 11:23:48 AM
  
  Comment: I love how you automatically associate liberals with communism that should make one disregard your comment right there. Then you do an ad hoc attack which makes no sense at all. Tufts is arguing for democracy, but as he states the dictators of the world are using Bush policies as a freaking punching bag which makes it that much harder for democracy to foster around the world. Signed, Commie leftist
Posted By: who says we are free? @ 12/14/2007 8:35:24 AM

Comment: you are wrong to compare Evo Morales to Hugo Chavez. Bolivia is the poorest of Latin American nations. in, the Indigneous people were not an oppressed minority, but AN OPPRESSED MAJORITY, dominated by a colonial elite. Evo Morales just ratified the UN Declaration of human rights for Indigenous Peoples as the law of Bolivia. he is a hero. you are not a careful journalist. THE UNITED STATES REFUSES TO ACCEPT THE UN DECLARATION OF HUMAN RIGHTS FOR INDIGENOUS PEOPLES because it is in cowardly denial of its atrocities against Native Americans, NOT IN THE PAST, BUT NOW, TODAY...and is afraid that it might have to pay back some of what it STOLE. the only people giving Evo Morales any trouble are a greedy racist elite who don't want to share their ill-gotten wealth, fortunes they made on the backs of an indigenous MAJORITY....get your facts straight. Evo Morales is a great leader and a national hero...we don't have too many of those in this country, sad to say
Posted By: ssbn777 @ 12/14/2007 8:00:08 AM

Comment: From day one in elementary school, we've had "Democracy" shoved down our thoughts. We've been fed over and over that Democracy is good, and Dictatorship is bad. And so, from 1946 on, we've been rampaging around the world forcing our government ideals on whoever we can, whenever we can. Democracy is a nice idea, but it doesn't take into account the 'sheep' factor. What do I mean by that? Well, if I said that the majority of Americans are idiots, everyone here would probably burn me at the stake. But think about it. Those of you who blame Bush -- about half the country voted for him. Those of you who blame Democrats -- a majority put them in power too. So nomatter where you stand politically, a majority of Americans elected politicians that messed everything up. Democracy enslaves us to the will of the majority, and doesn't take into account whether the majority is educated, or even knows what it wants, much less knows what???s good for the country.... I???m not saying that I do, or that I know any of the solutions, either; I???m just pointing out a few facts for people to think about.
Posted By: rajura @ 12/14/2007 6:33:50 AM

Comment: A benevolent dictator is the best form of goverment. like democracy hard to find
Posted By: eddiewhere @ 12/14/2007 2:42:50 AM

Comment: It is simple. Dictators are a product of their society. Government corruption and the uneven distribution of wealth, especially in Latin America has led to this comeback. Greed and Racism are the root causes of this uneven distribution of wealth. Carlos Andres Perez was a criminal who robbed Venezuelans of billions and billions of dollars. No one talks ABOUT THAT. WHY?? Because they know that it is TRUE.
Posted By: BarbaraB @ 12/14/2007 2:11:06 AM

Comment: Chavez does not have "control over most media outlets." All the national newspapers and commercial TV and radio stations are owned by vocal anti-Chavistas to go to great extremes to voice their opposition to his government, through distortions, slander and out-right lies. The only significant pro-Chavez media voices are those of government-owned operations, which form a small segment of the Veneuzelan media. In fact, Venezuelan opposition media has far more freedom - or at least is much better funded - than independent media in the USA.
Posted By: BarbaraB @ 12/14/2007 2:05:50 AM

Comment: Chavez does not have control over "most media outlets." Outside of the government radio and television (a small segment of Venezuelan media) most national newspapers, television stations and radio stations are owned by vocal opponents of the Chavez government and go to extremes to promote their views that often include distortion, slander and outright lies. There is probably more freedom of the opposition press in Venezuela than in the USA. At least it is much better funded than US independent media.