Monday, 25 June 2007


These last years the efforts to preach and spread democracy worldwide has remarkably increased. I cannot help thinking this to be as futile as my vain attempts to make our cat stand up and walk on two legs.

Nowadays, elections are being held in Iraq, in Afghanistan as well as in some other cutthroat countries in Africa, sponsored by the US and the European Union. Wherever these elections are being carried out we are being told here by our faithful media that a great step has been made towards peace and prosperity for everybody.

Ten deaths or less during procedures are considered splendid, kind of collateral damage, not to be fussed about. Same for some little vote rigging here or there or some trouble with the counting.

However, afterwards, business as usual: real changes are being made with the help of the knife, explosives, kidnapping. Anything is possible, but certainly not the idea that by presenting the last voting bulletin you can convince the present head of state or little warlord plus his family, clan or tribe to resign from his lucrative job.

Here in the West, we have had democracy in its primitive form for hundreds of years. The English Magna Carta goes back to the 13th Century and in Germany and the Netherlands the bigger towns - kind of citizen states - had an elected town council who governed.

And furthermore, in all these cities and regions as well as even in many absolute monarchies in Europe there was something like the rule of law. Not perfect, far from it, but there was a written law and it evolved slowly according to the needs.

Maybe not everybody knows this famous story of Frederic II from Prussia - an absolute monarch - who wanted to extend his castle ground by purchasing a nearby mill. Well, he never succeeded, the miller stubbornly didn't want to sell. Finally, after years of judiciary actions Frederic gave in.

All this means that countries like Afghanistan, Iraq or The Congo have no use for western democracy, they simply don't have the background. This non-violent way of government must come by the people there and certainly not from outside. Thus it may well need centuries or might never happen, God knows.

Meanwhile, let's better leave those countries alone to their own devices. At best, those who have the power outside, should sponsor a benevolent homegrown dictator who busies himself with building schools and roads and an efficient health system. That's the very best we all can hope for.


  1. Hi ,I knew before that maybe my post is not clear for foreigners because they don't have these affairs .It's some how like living with each other without marriage but at the end it wont end into marriage. The woman get her money and then left man. The bad point of this action is that Islamic governors of Iran are making it legal according to Islam rule which has been made about 1400 years ago, and they don't think about the future results.
    ...and about your post, Iraq and Afghanistan are both neighbors of Iran so I hear about the new conditions there daily. In Afghanistan situation is getting better and better,because they don't have any real governor before,so now efforts of USA and European countries and UN are getting tangible there.
    But in Iraq everything is different.Saddam wasn't a democrat man and also started 8 years war in Iran but at least he was ruling his country,at the time of him no one was allowed to kill anyone in Baghdad or rape or steal or make any other crime, but now,after killing him and entrance of USA army,lots of Iraqi people are killed everyday in Baghdad. From this point of view I'm totally agree with you,the meaning of democracy in modern countries are totally different than here.

  2. Georg: All too true, hence not much to add nor disagree about!

    Thanks for stopping by also. As for the picture, in irony it was, people living on their own, hunting, but, as we know, we all hunt and gather in grocery stores. Not all, but a majority it seems. Sorry, thought it might be obvious. These kinds of pictures are simply too creative and I enjoy how they put our life into a real perspective.

    Hope all is well otherwise your way! ; )

  3. thanks for visiting by blog. I just started reading's great to read an opposite mind from yours! :-)

    "benevolent homegrown dictator"

    hmmm, it is easy for us living in Western Democracies to offer "homegrown dictator" to Middle Eastern, but majority of people over there want what we have, otherwise they will not line up to migrate to come and live among us.

    Would you like to have a "homegrown dictator" in France??? I doubt that!

  4. Answer to Frieda,

    First, thanks for commenting. That IS democracy, you have a problem and you discuss it,honestly, so as to find the best arguments for the best solution.

    I never "offered" a homegrown dictator neither to the Middle East and certainly not to democratic France. I said "that is the best we can hope for" and in my mind, at least, that makes a difference.

    You are right to say that many mideastern people line up to live as we do, here in the West. But unfortunately that does not mean these people are ready to live by our democratic, lawful, non violent standards.

    Here in Western Europe we have people coming from Muslim countries
    and living here in second and even third generation and they have still not really adopted our way of living. Sure, they use a cell phone and drive modern cars. But deep inside they seem to be still in their cutthroat surroundings.


  5. We in America would be far more successful in with respect to the rest of the world were we lead by example, rather than by force of arms . . .

  6. "that does not mean these people are ready to live by our democratic, lawful, non violent standard"

    Why do you think there may NOT be ready? Actually, In America, immigrants have assimilated much better into our society as they have done in Europe.

  7. Hallo Frieda,

    You may be quite right. Most immigrants assimilate very well and especially in the United States this has been a success story.

    The vast majority of people immigrating into Western Europe assimilated normally. I belong to them, being German but living in France with my French wife. And my ancestors are coming partly from Hungary. The only exception - but a big one - seems to be people coming from the Maghreb (North Africa). Why this is so, I don't know.

    I don't think it is religion because there are thousands and thousands of Muslim Iranians, scattered worldwide and everywhere, they do not only assimilate, they are generally doing better than the people they come to live with.

  8. Writing a constitution for Japan, and then enforcing the rule of no state Shintoism, seemed to work fine. I don't see any reason why it couldn't work for the Middle East. The Japanese were equally suicidal and maniacal.

    The problem is, McCarthy was not very popular. It would take a similar figure to work that wonder in Iraq. Instead, Bush uninstalls Saddam (at least there was order)and lets them set up their own government - i.e. give power to the Shia, a bunch of religious thugs.


  9. Hey Monica,

    Thanks for commenting.

    Very interesting to read your opinionabout what is going on worldwide.

    The Japanese are suicidal and maniacal.

    The Shia is a bunch of religious thugs.

    General McArthur would have saved the Middle East from itself.

    I don't agree with you and as far as I see it, the facts don't do it either.

    Hope you don't mind too much reading this.


  10. Just seeing this comment now. Nope, didn't say the Japanese are suicidal and maniacal, only that they were. There's a difference. They've changed. :)