4 ms·

You spread democracy by showing it is better system. A lot of countries that converted to democracy did this because their populations looked up to US and want

You spread democracy by showing it is better system. A lot of countries that converted to democracy did this because their populations looked up to US and wanted to have better lief. You also put pressure on other countries when they claim are democratic but fail to do this in practice (which is the case of Belarus or Poland where I live). US does this actively and frequently in many forms, by voicing "concerns" or putting embargoes on countries that break their own rules. Obviously, that pressure is much less effective when you do same things you try to pressure other countries to not do.

mustafa_pasi 5y ago
I am not sure it is always a better system in all situations. Democracies are very easily corrupted by foreign influence. This is one of the reasons rich western countries love to "export democracy". One of the reasons strongmen rise to power in third world countries is as a reaction to imperialism. In that situation it is not even clear you can have a functioning democracy, and then the choice is between a puppet of foreign interests or a strongman.
- lmilcin 5y ago
  There exists no system that is best in all situations. Case in point, a system that does not care about rights of their inhabitants is usually much more effective at running large scale projects. For example, China just deciding to shut down everybody in their houses in Wuhan and shoot if you don't comply. And just like that they got their pandemic under control. > One of the reasons strongmen rise to power in third world countries is as a reaction to imperialism No, they rise because they can. And not just in third world countries. Germany was definitely not a third world country when it allowed Hitler to rise and start a global war. What about Putin? We see these guys mostly in third world countries now mainly because without democracy it is difficult to keep up with democracies without some special situation (like Saudi Arabia being gifted with huge oil reserves). In non-democracies normal people have trouble preserving their wealth over long periods of time. You need to be "in favours" of the ruling entity to be wealthy and the wealth vanishes if you fall out of it. Democracies are on the other hand, by definition, people ruling themselves, and this should in theory mean a lot of focus is on personal security and freedom. This should mean it is safer to conduct business over long periods of time, accumulate wealth and generally contribute to GDP.

mustafa_pasi 5y ago

I am not sure it is always a better system in all situations. Democracies are very easily corrupted by foreign influence. This is one of the reasons rich western countries love to "export democracy". One of the reasons strongmen rise to power in third world countries is as a reaction to imperialism. In that situation it is not even clear you can have a functioning democracy, and then the choice is between a puppet of foreign interests or a strongman.

lmilcin 5y ago
There exists no system that is best in all situations. Case in point, a system that does not care about rights of their inhabitants is usually much more effective at running large scale projects. For example, China just deciding to shut down everybody in their houses in Wuhan and shoot if you don't comply. And just like that they got their pandemic under control. > One of the reasons strongmen rise to power in third world countries is as a reaction to imperialism No, they rise because they can. And not just in third world countries. Germany was definitely not a third world country when it allowed Hitler to rise and start a global war. What about Putin? We see these guys mostly in third world countries now mainly because without democracy it is difficult to keep up with democracies without some special situation (like Saudi Arabia being gifted with huge oil reserves). In non-democracies normal people have trouble preserving their wealth over long periods of time. You need to be "in favours" of the ruling entity to be wealthy and the wealth vanishes if you fall out of it. Democracies are on the other hand, by definition, people ruling themselves, and this should in theory mean a lot of focus is on personal security and freedom. This should mean it is safer to conduct business over long periods of time, accumulate wealth and generally contribute to GDP.