A 500-word essay extolling its virtues and vices
Here is the promised essay for my Norwich University Master's degree program in Diplomacy:
Comments and criticisms are welcome. Honestly they are.
{singrdave}
Norwich University application essay
23 November 2005
The question of spreading democracy is on the minds of Americans these days. Is our American way of life the greatest thing around? Is democracy truly the best form of government for all the world's inhabitants?
Democracy encourages intelligence, equality, and creativity, for its success requires much of its constituents. Alexander Hamilton wrote in the Federalist Papers that the states of newly independent America needed to band together to form a union. The question facing their burgeoning nation was whether or not men could be trusted to lead their own people. To lead from within was the goal of this kingless new nation, where the ultimate responsibility would be to provide good governance with a mandate from the people rather than from an archaic right to a throne.
To be successful, democracy should be homegrown, not exported. While democracy brings with it freedoms that oppressed people do not enjoy, history favors the country which brings about its own internal changes. Democracy's ends do not always justify the means, as seen in recent news events. Cruelty, inequality, and bondage reign in nations without freedoms. One alternative to democracy is fierce and scary. The Stalinist state is seen as the most extreme example of totalitarianism; the term has come to encapsulate all that is evil, cruel, and hegemonic. This bipolarity between totalitarianism and democracy created a natural antipathy between America and the Soviet Union. By fighting totalitarianism, we tried to establish democracies.
The problems with democracy are also in Hamilton's seminal work. To allow men to choose their own collective destiny, they will inevitably begin to voice criticisms of that which is for the public good. Whether these negative passions bring an honest quest for understanding or a slap to the back of the head is up to fate.
Democracy has not always stuck, especially in places where the government was not seen as legitimate. In Nigeria and Zimbabwe, presidencies are mired in controversy while the countries rage in civil war. In South America after the Cuban Revolution, democracies collapsed when the leaders were elected by small margins or were appointed to fill a vacancy when a more legitimate leader died. According to Princeton professor Nancy Bermeo, leaders in failed democracies polarize themselves to one view or another, thus engendering extremism and revolution. Democracy is not always perceived as the best or most exciting form of government to choose.
Clearly, democracy does not guarantee success. Lack of democracy does not guarantee failure as a state, either. Iran does not subscribe to democratic ideals. They feel theocracy is their ideal form of government, and the Iranians seem to be doing just fine. Another example of a thriving nation is China, which has had a communist government since the early twentieth century. Despite human rights abuses, most notably the crackdown on dissent in Tiananmen Square, it is seen as a worker-friendly global powerhouse taking its first steps towards a capitalist society.
Clearly, democracy in the right hands can bring freedom and enlightenment. However, not successful countries are democracies. The stirrings of democracy should not be foisted upon an unsuspecting country; the populace should choose freedom for themselves.