Democracies and Freedom
Democracy and a free society has enabled the United States and in fact most every nation that has made an honest attempt at creating one, to be the most successful nations the world has ever seen.
Democracies in a free society have given us all previously unheard of freedoms and previously unpreserved rights all the while fighting and pushing back tyranny whenever the democracies have tried - isolating dictators and those who chose to rule by fiat and force over their populations, if not outright removing them from the face of the earth.
The only thing stopping democracies from continually doing this is the fact that the population in them usually does not feel the urge to rid the world of these regimes. Democracies have lead to 'enlightened' societies who like to fancy themselves so profound and wonderful that the rest of the world is too ignorant, the rest of the world is not cosmopolitan enough to know what to do; and to these types the rest of the world isn't worth saving. After all, according to them, nothing is black and white - who needs to be saved?
These types of people, all the while, try to sooth their minds - and those they try to convince - that if people live in squalor and under a dictator it is by choice and they wonder out loud asking, "Who are we to impose our ways upon them?" Maybe they like it.
When some nations do something they call 'going it alone', they boggle at the lack of a committee, and proclaim that - in the case of Iraq - there are bigger fish to fry. Of course, if asked if they'd support frying any of those bigger fish they quickly turn back to the argument that we should not impose our way of life upon others and that gets back to the top: They do not care what happens to the world because they really are not part of it.
People who call themselves 'citizens of the world' would do well saying that outside of the gates of the fortress our society provides for them. Would that stop them from being beheaded? This counterfeit altruism and confused worldliness does nothing to help anyone not attending their exclusive functions; and then it only pushes back the fact that they know is true: IF it were not for this society they probably would not be able to do what they currently do (especially if they are an entertainer).
Because of this nagging reality they go around and hold concerts and speak about the problems of far-off places because distance keeps it all so much more sanitary. Because they are so out of touch with reality and stand for nothing themselves, when they finally find a pet cause it becomes an obsession and they must recruit others to this belief because it does in fact replace religion for them.
Democracies in a free society have given us all previously unheard of freedoms and previously unpreserved rights all the while fighting and pushing back tyranny whenever the democracies have tried - isolating dictators and those who chose to rule by fiat and force over their populations, if not outright removing them from the face of the earth.
The only thing stopping democracies from continually doing this is the fact that the population in them usually does not feel the urge to rid the world of these regimes. Democracies have lead to 'enlightened' societies who like to fancy themselves so profound and wonderful that the rest of the world is too ignorant, the rest of the world is not cosmopolitan enough to know what to do; and to these types the rest of the world isn't worth saving. After all, according to them, nothing is black and white - who needs to be saved?
These types of people, all the while, try to sooth their minds - and those they try to convince - that if people live in squalor and under a dictator it is by choice and they wonder out loud asking, "Who are we to impose our ways upon them?" Maybe they like it.
When some nations do something they call 'going it alone', they boggle at the lack of a committee, and proclaim that - in the case of Iraq - there are bigger fish to fry. Of course, if asked if they'd support frying any of those bigger fish they quickly turn back to the argument that we should not impose our way of life upon others and that gets back to the top: They do not care what happens to the world because they really are not part of it.
People who call themselves 'citizens of the world' would do well saying that outside of the gates of the fortress our society provides for them. Would that stop them from being beheaded? This counterfeit altruism and confused worldliness does nothing to help anyone not attending their exclusive functions; and then it only pushes back the fact that they know is true: IF it were not for this society they probably would not be able to do what they currently do (especially if they are an entertainer).
Because of this nagging reality they go around and hold concerts and speak about the problems of far-off places because distance keeps it all so much more sanitary. Because they are so out of touch with reality and stand for nothing themselves, when they finally find a pet cause it becomes an obsession and they must recruit others to this belief because it does in fact replace religion for them.
posted by Edward W. Prather at 18:58
<< Home