4 ms·
The tragedy of democracies is that it does not really encourage democracies elsewhere. As leaders of a democracy strive for high living standards within their
by Svip 6y ago
The tragedy of democracies is that it does not really encourage democracies elsewhere. As leaders of a democracy strive for high living standards within their own borders, wages and thus the cost of living goes up. But participants in a democracy (i.e. the voters) still wish to encourage their leaders for cheaper products. Be it bananas or electronics.
In an isolated system, the consequence of such advances in social structures should be that the newer higher cost of living is the price one pays for a higher standard of living. But countries aren't isolated, and thus democratic leaders try to exploit less democratic countries for their own benefits, be it via covert action, foreign aid or other forms of diplomatic pressure.
China, on the other hand, is one of the few (former, I should say) developing nations that have fought back, once they gained enough political power internationally. The Western world have become heavily reliant on China and its cheap production engine (to put it very simply), and China can thus force the same Western democracies to side with them on diplomatic issues closer to their home.
Ask an American or a Frenchman how important to their livelihood Hong Kong's freedom or Taiwan's independence is, and they would probably rate it low among their list of priorities. Their cheap electronics come first. Does it matter to a Canadian shopkeeper whether Muslim minorities in China are treated humanely? Probably not as much as access to Chinese manufactured equipment.
You may be quick to think our leaders are corrupted by the Chinese regime, but in reality, they are merely doing what their voters want them to do. Voters tend to be rather narrowly focused on what is in front of them, rather than wanting their government spent money and resources on someone else's freedom. Particularly if those regimes avoid directly attacking those democracies (see Pearl Harbor for an example of this mistake).
- mattmanser 6y agoYou're confusing/conflating capitalism with democracy.
- Svip 6y agoYou can argue that democracy is merely an empty shell wherein to levy opinions. And in that context, I am talking about liberal capitalist democracies. But the voters themselves are capitalist, or rather don't have a problem with capitalism, hence why they don't vote leaders out that follow a capitalistic line. But I would not say I am conflating the two. The simple equation is that democracy does not foster democracy by itself. Capitalism in those democracies hinters that.
- redis_mlc 6y ago> they are merely doing what their voters want them to do they are merely doing what their lobbyists want them to do FTFY.
- Svip 6y agoI too wish I could relief myself of any responsibility, and levy the blame entirely on the corrupt system, that I have little-to-no influence over. But the truth is, the people of any democracy are the true source of power. And if I asked you to join me in rising up against our current flawed political system, you'd probably hesitate as you are probably doing well enough to not wanting to rock the boat. I know this, because I am the same. I recognise that our systems are flawed, but I also recognise that I - as a voter - am partially to blame for this. And yet, I also feel comfortable enough to let and let live.
- luckylion 6y ago> But the truth is, the people of any democracy are the true source of power. They may be the horses towing the cart, but they are not the driver. You are right that they won't want to revolt and potentially destroy the system because it's working "well enough" for them, but that's far from being the ones who decide the course of the nation.
- redis_mlc 6y agoI don't even know where to start with this. When you have 2 parties that nominate oligarchs, your vote is already wasted. The only influence that the average citizen has is to get involved at the city council level and help the right people climb into influence. But when you have to choose between Trump and a Clinton, it's too late to make a difference.
- jsnider3 6y ago> The tragedy of democracies is that it does not really encourage democracies elsewhere. This is actually false. The reason Russia and China care so much about Ukraine and Taiwan, is because they worry having a functional democracy next door may destabilize their own regimes.
- jacquesm 6y agoRussia cares about Ukraine for another reason: strategic access to the Black Sea.
- sergeykish 6y agoRussian government use external enemy to shift attention from internal problems. All state owned media attention is on Chechnya, Abkhazia, Crimea. "The might of the russian troops"... Tsarism never ended, it just shifts masks.
- dntbnmpls 6y ago> The reason Russia and China care so much about Ukraine and Taiwan, is because they worry having a functional democracy next door may destabilize their own regimes. China cared about Taiwan when it was a authoritarian dictatorship for most of its history. I don't think it's a matter of government but a matter of lost territory. Using your logic, the north was worried about the functional democracy of the confederacy. Even if taiwan adopted communism, it wouldn't matter because it's a matter of territorial integrity. Meaning, it's just as lightly that we'd let south carolina secede than china would allow taiwan to leave. As for russia, considering that it's a democratic republic, I don't think they are too worried about that. What they are worried about is the geopolitical issues with ukraine - especially foreign interference in ukraine.
- distances 6y agoRussia has no shortage of top-notch democracies next door.
- JumpCrisscross 6y ago> Russia has no shortage of top-notch democracies next door Correct, but none with a Slavic majority. Similar with China. Lots of democracies. None with mostly Han Chinese. The threat to both comes from the disabling of their argument that democracy doesn’t work for “their” people. It’s difficult for Russia to define a set of people that encompasses its population but excludes Ukrainians. Same for Beijing with respect to Hong Kong and Taiwan.