[traderrob6]

I think this article testifes to the utter ignorance of it's author

[mainepatsfan]

He should go tell this to the Iraqi people. They'll give him another finger salute.

[dirtboy]

Amid raptures of self-congratulation, the Bush administration & its supporters take credit for the birth of democracy in Iraq--ignorant of the fact that democracy & liberty aren't synonyms

One can have tyranny with democracy. But one cannot have liberty without some form of democracy underneath, because the sovereign no longer has to react to the will of the poeple.

[eyespysomething]

What do you make of this article?

[trebb]

Until an Islaamic theocracy becomes a fact, all this hype is just an exercise in Bush bashing through prophesy. The Lefties have no problem finding fault with things that have already occured and went well; it is a real cakewalk to nay say something that hasn't happened yet. of course, this guy was also probably part of the crew that said no election could possibly occur. Now that one has, he has to smear the next thing that hasn't happened yet. I may get hit by a car tomorrow, but that possibility won't keep me huddled in my warm, safe closet.

[hinckley buzzard]

"The Rwandan genocide, perpetrated by that African nation’s Hutu majority against its Tutsi minority, could be considered a particularly vigorous exercise of the type of democracy Madison alluded to."

Why are you wasting our time linking to gibbering idiots who smear the walls with this kind of effluent?

[John Lenin]

In the liberal mind, even if you win, you still lose. That's why liberals are the party of losers.

[Richard Kimball]

I can add to that:

Whining isn't working

Kerry isn't President

Kennedy isn't coherent

You could do a lot of those.

[JimRed]

The modern definition of democracy should be the right to choose your leadership and the form of your government. If they choose a theocracy, a constitutional monarchy or a republic, they have to live with the results.

Let us pray that they choose wisely.

[Valin]

ignorant of the fact that democracy & liberty aren't synonyms.

True but the two do seem to go together. Last time I checked there's not a lot of Liberty in Dictatorships.

[ChadGore]

[Fenris6]

"...ignorant of the fact that democracy and liberty aren't synonyms... were also testifying of their utter ignorance regarding republican liberty."

Maybe I missed it - does the author support this allegation anywhere in his article?

And I think he missed the point re the Purple Congress-critters - its a show of Solidarity with the brave Iraqi's. Would he accuse the yellow-bracelet wearers of exploiting Lance Armstrong?

[Fiddlstix]

BTTT

[ops33]

Democracy may not be liberty but its a hell of a lot better than tyranny!

[Diva Betsy Ross]

There is some pretty fancy pretzel logic....

[rmlew]

In so far as liberty and democracy are often at odds, I certain agree with Griggs. However, the Grand Ayatollah Ali al-Sistani is not a follower of Khomenei.

[KC_Conspirator]

Liberals: Freedom is slavery and slavery is freedom. Welcome to 1984.

[x]

Much of what Grigg says is true. It's about peace, though. The idea is that people in democratic capitalist societies aren't going to support or put up with leaders who fight wars of conquest or with ideologies that promote such wars. If we are individuals with responsibility for our own lives, the freedom to improve our lot, and the right to choose our governors, we won't risk everything on dictatorship and war or put up with someone who does. It's a dicey proposition, and plenty of wars are fought to implement it.

The democratization project didn't work for Woodrow Wilson after WWI, in large part because the democracies didn't stay in place. The result was warlike tyrants of a worse sort than before. After WWII it did work in some important countries, partly because defeat was so total, and partly because earlier efforts at democratization had paved the way. Such a project didn't work after African and Asian decolonization, probably because it wasn't really tried. Perhaps, one could say that it's more or less working now in Latin America.

It's a "bourgeois," ordinary, middle class consumerist project. If one has a very expansive idea of freedom or justice or human possibilities, if one is committed to living passionately, one won't much care for the project. Left or right, those who expect more out of life and politics than suburban existence provides, cubicles and shopping malls will be dissatisfied with democraticization.

The thing about the Birchers is they have a bit of a romantic streak. Though they're as middle class as anyone else, they have dreams of the greater freedom of frontier America. Whether or not we can get back to such freedom ourselves, it's not something the old world has known for hundreds if not thousands of years, so it's unlikely to be realized in Europe or the Middle East. So it's natural that the Birchers oppose such a project.

The interesting thing is that the "Straussians" who are supposed to be at the bottom of all this, were quite critical of the modern suburban consumerist "Last Man." Some of them -- and they're quite a diverse bunch -- wanted to live more heroic, tragic, or epic lives, free from the restrictions of modern democratic society. Today's neoconservative project is the sort of thing that some Straussians would truly abhore.

[hosepipe]

Democracy is the disease that causes socialism which is merely a symptom of democracy... No democracy ever existed that was NOT a socialist system.. Democracy causes socialism.. in every place, in every time, always..

Thats why the U.S. Constitution has three words found nowhere within it..

1) democracy..
2) democractic..
3) or democrat... its not an oversight, its on purpose..

Democracy breeds socialism which is slavery by government..