Fermer X Les cookies sont necessaires au bon fonctionnement de 24hGold.com. En poursuivant votre navigation sur notre site, vous acceptez leur utilisation.
Pour en savoir plus sur les cookies...
Cours Or & Argent en

Dictators or Democracy

IMG Auteur
Lew Rockwell
Publié le 03 octobre 2015
1337 mots - Temps de lecture : 3 - 5 minutes
( 0 vote, 0/5 )
Imprimer l'article
  Article Commentaires Commenter Notation Tous les Articles  
Notre Newsletter...
Rubrique : Article du Jour

After World War II, the U.S. oversaw the establishment of democracies in the defeated Germany and Japan. However, it had no policy of promoting democracy in most other foreign countries. Indeed, for a long time after World War II, the U.S. government under both major parties supported non-democratic (often called illiberal) foreign governments that were run by authoritarians or dictators. In its anti-Communist fervor, the U.S. aligned with right-wing and stood against left-wing movements.

Beginning with the Carter administration and continuing thereafter, the U.S. shifted toward democracy promotion in foreign lands. Democracy promotion is now a firmly-established cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy. This goal is the moral foundation of U.S. foreign policy planet-wide. Other goals, often also associated with democracy, such as security and prosperity, are myths, and they lack the moral gloss and appeal of democracy as now promulgated by American leaders to its captive domestic body politic.

Following the immoral rule that the end justifies the means, this policy of democracy promotion is in U.S. hands one of interfering in other nations, intervening militarily, conquering, killing, collateral killing, infrastructure destruction, subversion of standing governments, aid to dissident groups, overthrowing elected leaders, sanctions of all kinds, and training and arming selected rebels.

However, in the rhetoric of U.S. government leaders, “democracy” is the term that embraces the many values that make American hearts beat faster, that foster American hopes and dreams and that present the promise of better lives. For American leaders and Americans, democracy has come to represent freedom of speech, of association, and of religion. It means the capacity to vote. It means equality and equal opportunity. Democracy now has come to mean justice and human dignity. One need only read or hear a few speeches on the subject to verify these observations.

The U.S. government follows up on democracy promotion with destruction and a pronounced inability to replicate the construction of democracy in two countries that had been reduced to rubble: Germany and Japan. Indeed, in country after country it is U.S. policy (or at least its effect) to reduce the country to rubble, drive the standard of living sharply lower and create masses of displaced persons and refugees. This was the pre-condition to conquering Germany and Japan, and it now appears to be the sought after pre-condition in places like Iraq, Libya and Yemen.

There is nothing moral about this, but American leaders, living in a delusionary world of their own rhetoric, continue to insist that what they are doing has been successful and right. They say that they have saved or are saving the masses from dictators. The gulf between belief and reality has never been wider than in the present among American leaders.

Democracy promotion is a failed goal that has given rise to one policy failure after another, benefiting only the military-industrial-intelligence complex. It is more than apparent that the moral goal of enhancing freedom cannot be furthered by the U.S. government deploying its vast powers of finance and spending in the service of immoral means that destroy entire peoples, nations, countries and states for the purpose of promoting democracy.

This goal is futile in the theory of government, and it is futile in practice as employed by one government in an attempt to impose or create its version of government in other lands.

The futility in theory rests on a basic misunderstanding of government. No government of any kind, including democracy, is anything but a wild beast. Governments in control of states are all at heart ready to devour their peoples because the control and containment of them by the people is such a difficult proposition. Government of the people, by the people and for the people is never achieved in modern states and can’t be achieved because government powers are too great, even under constitutions, maybe especially under constitutions. Legalities often do not present bars to greater government power; they present loopholes to subvert and around which government power is augmented.

The notion in theory of extending democracy as if it were going to free peoples and save the world is fundamentally flawed. All it aims for is the replacement of one form of government by another, but they are all beasts. When the U.S. chooses immoral means to further its supposedly moral goal of promoting democracy (which is actually also an immoral goal), this verifies the beastly and totally immoral nature of government and of this democracy that is supposed to be the exemplar of democracy on the planet.

The U.S. government, if it wanted to choose a better goal and were capable of it, should support neither authoritarian nor democratic regimes. It should leave the matter of foreign government structures to the foreign peoples. It’s pointless to destroy a country and many of its people, all the while creating enemies and blowback, in order to replace one beast by another. This doesn’t create free speech, freedom of association, due process of law, freedom of religion, and all the rest. Pre-emptive or any other kinds of interventions intended to alter forms of government cannot accomplish this, because they merely substitute one form of government for another.

Moreover, who is to say that when America attempts to or succeeds in substituting a tiger for a lion that this is an improvement? How do American leaders know that they are improving some foreign situation? They don’t.

Why do American leaders think that their judgment is superior to the governmental outcomes that have evolved in other lands? There exist, as we have seen in Iraq and elsewhere, often hidden reasons why a state is authoritarian. Governments are generally not all-powerful. They are contained in various ways, even if imperfectly, and the caged beasts serve some ends, even if American leaders do not recognize, understand or acknowledge them. Promoting democracy? What kind of democracy? Who is to say that a revolution brought about by the residents of a country or brought about by the U.S. is going to result in a better government, one that is of the people, by the people and for the people? What happens when the “people” is actually several peoples or tribes or ethnic groups or religious groups that do not get along with one another? What happens when a power struggle to control a new government appears? What happens when new revolutionary forces emerge? What if secessionary movements appear or people demand new borders? What if new constitutions have provisions that are worse than the old ones?

In practice, the U.S. goal of promoting democracy is just as flawed as it is in theory. America’s leaders do not appreciate or understand the equilibrium of domestic interests that has produced a foreign government. They think that replacing a foreign government is like replacing a hard drive or a fan belt. Maybe it’s harder and requires more resources, but it is a job with well-defined parameters. They are completely wrong. In practice, every intervention is beset with immense confusion. One need only read the history of U.S. interventions in Haiti, Nicaragua, Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Yemen, Libya, Ukraine and many other countries to see that confusion is the rule, not the exception.

The U.S. keeps failing over and over and over again with every intervention it attempts, in the sense that Americans are harmed and foreign nations are harmed. Only those who benefit from wars, fighting and confusion gain, and this includes some foreign interests, defense contractors, military personnel and many in government.

Democracy promotion remains the dominant moral rationale for U.S. interventions but it’s profoundly flawed. It would be far, far better if Americans openly recognized the inherent evil and flaws of all governments of any kind, including democracy, and then took this as a cue to limit this domestic government wherever possible. That would mean avoiding foreign interventions. That attitude is more in line with at least some strains of thought that were voiced closer to the creation of the U.S. government, even if history shows that the nation went in precisely the opposite direction.


Données et statistiques pour les pays mentionnés : Haiti | Iran | Nicaragua | Ukraine | Yemen | Tous
Cours de l'or et de l'argent pour les pays mentionnés : Haiti | Iran | Nicaragua | Ukraine | Yemen | Tous
<< Article précedent
Evaluer : Note moyenne :0 (0 vote)
>> Article suivant
Publication de commentaires terminée
Dernier commentaire publié pour cet article
Soyez le premier à donner votre avis
Ajouter votre commentaire
Top articles
Derniers Commentaires
Les Français n’auraient pas confiance dans leurs élus ? Comme c’est...
16 févr.merisier1
Nous n'avons pas des représentants du peuple, mais des élus (ce qui n'est pas du tout le même chose) grâce à un découpage et un mécanisme électoral...
Les Français n’auraient pas confiance dans leurs élus ? Comme c’est...
16 févr.Saphir
Sans commentaire. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=slSE3nfc1Rw Complet : https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=euLcmlwhwY0
Inflation à 148 107 au Venezuela !
15 févr.napo0
Maduro, le mentor de Méchancon !
Le pays du mensonge et les monopoles prédateurs - Une maison divisée
14 févr.zelectron2
Le pays du mensonge et des monopoles prédateurs y compris la France de par son État et son gouvernement qui renforce tous les jours par tous les mo...
L’action humaine est une action déterminée
14 févr.zelectron2
Au fond, une petite, moyenne ou grande partie de l'action humaine est libre sauf à sacrifier sa propre faculté de penser donc décider, en s'inféoda...
Saletés d’armes à feu qui protègeraient des gens honnêtes !
14 févr.zelectron3
Début 1939 le gouvernement socialiste a interdit les armes, merci pour ne pas avoir pu résister tout de suite aux allemands, il est a noter que les...
Saletés d’armes à feu qui protègeraient des gens honnêtes !
14 févr.zelectron1
je préfère être un vivant illégal, qu'un mort légal.
Les dates de consommation… le gaspillage en bande organisée !
13 févr.Cracker's
Tout d'abord, il faut bien intégrer la notion de DLUO et de DLC. DLC : Date Limite de consommation, c'est à dire une date à respecter impé...
Articles les plus commentésFavorisPlus...
Flux d'Actualités