posted on Oct, 15 2006 @ 01:32 PM
Democracy is supposed to be a process whereby the people elect, by majority, those that will represent them in the running of their country.
Therefore, whoever is elected should have been favoured by the majority of the people over which they will reign.
So much for theory!
If I make the assumption that America is a democratic country, then I have to assume that the majority of Americans want George W Bush to run America.
However, due to the nature of the American election process, I see no way to either prove or disprove that.
Now, George W Bush has taken it upon himself, on behalf of the American people, to confront Terrorism, Iraq, Iran, North Korea and Afghanistan (to
name but a few). In doing so, he has sought allies around the world to, at least, give the whole thing the look of international action (surely the
provence of the UN rather than any single nation - is that not what it was set up for).
However, given the world population, Americans alone do not constitute a majority and only Americans can vote for their President. Therefore, the
majority of the world (by a considerable margin) have had no say in who is the 'world policeman'.
Some of America's 'allies' have been coerced into that position by America's economic power and military might. Like the President of Pakistan is
doing his political future heaps of good by siding with America (What was the phrase used by Bush - Side with us or we will bomb you back into the
So, the power of the UN, which was set up to handle international disputes in a democratic fashion, has been usurped by the leader of one nation.
This leader has stated that he is doing these things to 'allow' these countries to 'enjoy' the benefits of democracy. Isn't this exactly the
'crime' levelled at the Soviet Union? And the Nazis before them - all the way back to the Romans really? Exporting their political idiology by
I live in a democratic country and have a vote in who I want to run my country (and voting is mandatory - unlike the US), but I've had no opportunity
to vote for or against George Bush to run the world. Where is the the democracy in that? And that doesn't sound like an attractive package to sell to
those countries that do not have a democratic tradition.
So, what, exactly do we have here..... Is the War on Terror simply an act of revenge for 9/11, with 'allies' pressured into support, or is it a
matter of the people of the rest of the world not deserving to have a say about how their world is being run. Or is it simply the flexing of
America's economic and military might, regardless of whatever anyone else might think.
If it's a matter of America not giving a damn about what the people of the world think, then I see no difference between that and the early 20th
Century Germanic superior race theories which brought Adolf Hitler to power.
I see no democracy at work here. Show me how this is in any way democratic!
[edit on 15/10/06 by The Winged Wombat]