Chua makes an excellent contribution re the problems of transition from autocracy to freedom . . . but her proposed solutions are dubious and her comments on 9/11 don't seem well founded.



I think we have had a fetish with democracy and, while still praising it, we also have to see its limitations. Democracy is a check upon rulers, and a dispersion of limited political power to the people; but it is only a part of overall freedom. What she's observing is the failure of unchecked majoritarian governments.

Some relevant observations are here
.

I'd say the ethnic hatred was already there,

a degree of social fluidity just lets it bubble over.



The idea that any society can be democratic is

absurd. It is the most difficult operation ever

devised by the human mind. Mere brain

surgery is a snap compared with free self-government.





It is also the case that people do not naturally

aspire to liberty. It's a learned behavior, although

not that many have learned it. We may take,

for example, Pakistan. Despite the alleged

advantages of a humane religion of peace and

the undoubted advantages of hands-on

instruction from the inventors of free self-government,

Pakistanis show hardly any interest in liberty.



Examples could be repeated endlessly.

Harry/pj:



Perhaps we need to differentiate between Democracy, democracy, and democratizing. Obviously no society should be as "free" as Somalia or whatever. Nor does it particularly matter whether a country adopts a Repulic like we did or parliamentary system. Meanwhile, the definition of democracy should be broad enough to cover any society where there are representative forms of government, even if they aren't particularly powerful yet--which means we should have patience with authoritarian governments (franco, Pinochet, Trujillo, Putin, etc.) as they establish the preconditions for eventual democracy.

I think Harry's right on these points, if one substitutes "free" for "democratic" in the 2nd paragraph . . . on "freedom," I would say this is a condition of an absence of coercion and conflict in society. Achieving this requires (a) universal consensus over who has the right to do what (the "rule of law"), or else people would be fighting over rights; (b) a general renunciation of violence & coercion (liberty). Somalia therefore has never been free, and many majoritarian democracies have not been either.

oj - on your last point (Pinochet et al) - I think that is the lesson - it is necessary to build the consensus about rights (rule of law), to reduce the role of the coercive state in society, and to build intellectual and cultural support for cooperation before democracy can check, rather than exaggerate, conflict and fighting passions.

Harry:



Pakistan would probably be a lot more enamoured of democracy if we actually had democratically elected rulers who hadn't done such an awful job of running the country.



Having a populace desirous of democracy is one thing. But what's really essential is a responsible elite who can build the necessary institutions instead of lining their own pockets.

Mr. Choudury, my personal experience with

Pakistanis has been uniformly good. I sort of

picked on Pakistan because it has more going

for it toward "democracy" than some other

places. Yet, as you say, it isn't there.



A corrupt electoral system must indeed have

something to do with that.



pj, Orrin etc.: I used "democracy" as a

shorthand that other people use. When

talking globally, it is a term I find rather

vague. I prefer "popular self-government."



That, I think, covers both pj's freedom and

liberty aspects. I can imagine popular

self-governments that would not look

very democratic to most Americans. The

island states of the South Pacific, for example,

where the people elect the chiefs to run

their parliaments and administrations, are a

good example of melding traditional and

modern political ideas. (Elites are offended if

you suggest they elect the chiefs, though, so

if I were you I wouldn't say it to their faces,

especially not to a Fijian.)

The widespread availability of a decent education, education, education. And a basic respect for civics inculcated, somehow. Basic respect for law, and the ability to enforce those laws.



No small feat.

Harry:



That's how I use it too.