3 ms·

> The West is fighting for a unipolar world This may be what the West is fighting for, in a cynical fashion. And it’s not exactly wrong: “the West” is a lot of

> The West is fighting for a unipolar world This may be what the West is fighting for, in a cynical fashion. And it’s not exactly wrong: “the West” is a lot of people and some have motivations that are less than noble. But an alternative argument is that the West is fighting for liberal democracy as an alternative to authoritarian governance (or “democracy in name only” authoritarianism.) It's become fashionable recently to claim that liberal democracy is on the ropes, and to argue that the future will be full of effective authoritarian governments (despite over a century of such governments being out-competed by modern democracies.) The Ukraine war is a hell of a showcase for the weakness of that strategy. At the end of the day, the real lesson the world should take from this war is that democracy (and particularly liberal democracy) simply works better than authoritarian systems: not because it’s perfect, but because it gives societies a way to course-correct and recover from corruption and stupid mistakes. During peaceful times it's really easy to forget this and get frustrated by democracy: there’s a lot of appeal to the idea of handing governance over to an effective strongman. But even if you somehow luck into a brilliant strongman, dictators eventually age and make mistakes. When that inevitably happens your government won't have the structures necessary to correct them. The performance of the Russian military in Ukraine is an extreme example that shows how naturally self-limiting this strategy can be.

pydry 5y ago
>an alternative argument is that the West is fighting for liberal democracy Trying to reverse the results of a referendum where 80% voted and 90% voted yes and multiple western polls confirm the result doesnt exactly show a resounding commitment to democracy. Nor does being besties with Saudi Arabia. From an imperialistic perspective both make perfect sense though. Saudi is a global energy chokepoint and Crimea is a regional strategic chokepoint for a rival empire.
- matthewdgreen 5y ago
  I choose not to give much weight to a referendum held under military occupation. More generally, "the West is a lot of different people." Many of them are lousy and have made lousy decisions, such as the support for Saudi Arabia. Democracy doesn't mean perfection, and I'm hugely in favor of making it better. I don't think supporting the current basket of authoritarian regimes on offer is "better". We can agree to disagree.
  - pydry 5y ago
    How do you square your belief in democracy with your belief that 90% of Crimeans who want the referendum result respected should be totally ignored? (90% was also the result of a German run poll 2 years later without tanks present... the poll was consistent with the referendum) It's worth bearing in mind that Kyiv has no intention of rerunning the poll if Russia leaves likely coz they know what the result would be. It will simply reincorporate the territory. The only vote that was ever going to happen after Maidan was with Russian tanks present. I dont think this is about agreeing to disagree or about accepting imperfections in democracy. This is about an overarching willingness of our society to discard democracy when it conflicts with western imperialist objectives. Not only are we willing to do it we are willing to engage in orwellian doublethink about it.

pydry 5y ago

>an alternative argument is that the West is fighting for liberal democracy Trying to reverse the results of a referendum where 80% voted and 90% voted yes and multiple western polls confirm the result doesnt exactly show a resounding commitment to democracy. Nor does being besties with Saudi Arabia. From an imperialistic perspective both make perfect sense though. Saudi is a global energy chokepoint and Crimea is a regional strategic chokepoint for a rival empire.

matthewdgreen 5y ago
I choose not to give much weight to a referendum held under military occupation. More generally, "the West is a lot of different people." Many of them are lousy and have made lousy decisions, such as the support for Saudi Arabia. Democracy doesn't mean perfection, and I'm hugely in favor of making it better. I don't think supporting the current basket of authoritarian regimes on offer is "better". We can agree to disagree.
- pydry 5y ago
  How do you square your belief in democracy with your belief that 90% of Crimeans who want the referendum result respected should be totally ignored? (90% was also the result of a German run poll 2 years later without tanks present... the poll was consistent with the referendum) It's worth bearing in mind that Kyiv has no intention of rerunning the poll if Russia leaves likely coz they know what the result would be. It will simply reincorporate the territory. The only vote that was ever going to happen after Maidan was with Russian tanks present. I dont think this is about agreeing to disagree or about accepting imperfections in democracy. This is about an overarching willingness of our society to discard democracy when it conflicts with western imperialist objectives. Not only are we willing to do it we are willing to engage in orwellian doublethink about it.