Paul Kengor at NRO on why the Bush policy of bringing democratic peace to the Middle East will be the toast of
A great article relating the fledgling Afghan and Iraqi democracies to the course of the late 20th century
"In the academic field of international relations, one of the few useful debates is the "democratic peace" argument. It postulates a crucial reality: Democracies tend not to fight one another. Consequently, to the extent that the hostile Middle East becomes more democratic, it may become more peaceful. George W. Bush subscribes to this hope.
The president's most far-reaching address was his November 6, 2003, speech to the National Endowment for Democracy, which ought to be required reading for every poli-sci class. The president that day reminded the crowd that in the early 1970s there were only 40 democracies. As the 20th century ended, there were 120. "[A]nd I can assure you," he said to applause, "more are on the way."
Contrast that with Kerry and his, why wont the terrorists just go back to being a "nuisance". You understand why this site is so pro GW. The man understands. So very easy for us living in stable countries to whine and complain about the abuse of our democratic freedoms, but when your explicit policy is to bring those freedoms to the world it seems to me an admirable thing. I doubt that our NZ lefties and their UN/France mates would agree but frankly they are history. Personally I can see a new international body being constituted that is made up of only democratically elected nations. That would be a GW second term task.
Bush will be the toast of history? Now I *do* see why you are so pro-GW.
Toast is delicious.
Posted by: jarrod | Oct 21, 2004 at 05:02 AM