"I'll strongly disagree with your claim that a race is "genetically not amenable to civil democracy". I'm not aware of any scientific evidence of a "democracy gene" in our DNA."
I perhaps should have said "culturally and religiously" not amenable to civil democracy. DNA was a poor choice of a word by me.
With this substitution, does the premise stand the test of the facts? I am not aware of a true civil democracy by arab muslims.
Are you?
With that change, it seems like a more accurate observation of history.
I am not aware of a true civil democracy by arab muslims.
Lebanon has a nominal democracy. Egypt claims to be a democracy, but we all know that it is really a strongman government. Most of the rest of hereditary monarchies or outright dictatorships. Some democratic institutions are starting to form in places like Kuwait, Jordan and even Saudi Arabia. Over time, I think we'll see more Arab democracies, but it won't happen overnight.
Fifty years ago, people were saying that the Koreans were incapable of democracy, that Rhee's regime was a dictatorship etc. But South Korea has proved such views wrong. That said, I have less faith in the Arabs because of their religion. It is strongly resistant to modern ideas. The best we can hope is an Islamic Republic that is not hostile to the United States.