Afghanistan between Civilization and Barbaric Conditions

 The United States and its allies are pulling their military forces out of Afghanistan. Naturally this raises concerns for the future of this country and its people. In this post I will analyze the past and future developments of Afghanistan and related cases.

 

 

THEORETICAL BASIS

Afghanistan is part of the Oriental civilization. This civilization roughly covered and still covers the Middle East and North Africa. It was clearly traceable from around 500 BC and had its dynamic period from around 0 to AD 1500. It encompassed many peoples and religions like Jews, early Christians, Persians, Zoroastrians, Manichaeans, partly the hybrid Byzantine empire, Armenians, Moslems and Arabs.

 

I have earlier analyzed the interaction between this civilization and the Western civilization (including Russia and China) from different angles

- Remnants’  defense.

- Westernization.

- Last barbarians.

- Re-awoken modernities.

- Enclave-nations and transformation to western type territorial nations.

 

In this post I will use a limited set of these angles to gain a deeper but manageable understanding of present developments, not least in Afghanistan.

 

Much of the following is written in past tense, but is still largely relevant today.

 

Civilizations have commonalities in their course of development.  But all civilizations have their own characteristics.  This also concerns their concept of a nation. The Oriental civilization has nations which are quite unlike those of the Western civilization. We in the West have nations with coherent areas and people with certain common traits like allegiance, religion, language or political system.

 

In the Oriental world nations were spread among each other in a patchwork of bigger and smaller enclaves. The ghetto is a such enclave of small size. A nation of this type lived over large areas within such enclaves without direct territorial connection. Of course nations constituting a large majority did often live in coherent territories with the enclaves of the minorities spread among them. Here a porfyric rock would be a better picture than a patchwork. But the idea was the same. A territorial barrier did not matter. Each nation was kept together by often religious leaders administrating all members no matter their place of living. Emissaries and written messages played a big role. Often a nation had its own script. Paulus is an early example of a such leader in the Christian nation. A nation had members which shared religion, ethnicity and /or  political opinion.

 

Often there was a structure of superordinate political entities or superstates with coherent territories ruling over a collection of such enclaves of numerous nations. These superstates were only held together by power. Early we saw the Parthian and Sassanid Persian Empires containing Zoroastrians, Jews, Greek heathens, Hindus, Buddhists and Christians.  The later Moslem dynasties like Umayyads or Samanids or Fatimids continued this principle. The Ottoman Empire was a late very good example of a such superordinate structure. Note that different contemporary superstates could house the same collection of nations.

 

Such nations continue to live in enclaves also when they immigrate to other civilizations. The Jews as part of the Oriental civilization lived like this in old Europe. Even today the so called parallel societies of Moslem immigrants in Western cities are an example of this.

 

As written in earlier posts, today the Oriental civilization becomes westernized, and its nations adopt the Western idea of territorial nations. They want territorial coherent nations. This has led to the terrible ethnic cleansings we have seen over the last century.

 

 

GENERALIZATION

The concept of the Oriental nation may be generalized. As seen, in the Western cities Jews and Moslems lived or still live in enclaves even though the society around them is another civilization. More broadly we can generalize the relation between different Oriental nations to 

 

- The relation between Oriental nations and other civilizations,

 

- The relation between people with different degrees of westernization,

 

- The relation between people with different political opinion, and 

 

- Ultimately to peoples with different degrees of civilization as such. 

 

In all these cases, if only one of the involved groups is an Oriental nation, then from the viewpoint of this group, the different group can be seen as another nation. And if the other groups are also wholly or partly Oriental nations, they all view the difference as one between nations. This can potentially have disastrous consequences as these nations become westernized in the sense that they now want ethnically clean coherent territories like the ones Western nations have. This is crucial for the understanding of developments in Afghanistan and other parts of the Middle East.

 

Also peoples which live culturally outside, but geographically inside the Oriental civilization can in the context of this civilization be seen as constituting nations of their own. They can then gradually be assimilated and some may later again become dis-assimilated in different degrees. In this way the Oriental civilization in its Moslem version has swallowed both civilized peoples and less civilized “barbarians”. Especially the latter could become at first civilized and later in different degrees revert to their original condition. 

 

This way of relating to different peoples aided the rapid expansion over large areas of this civilization, especially under the Arabs . Enormous territories in North Africa and Central Asia could be conquered without it being necessary to control them all culturally. Instead the invading nations installed themselves in enclaves in strongholds at different locations spread over the conquered areas. The surrounding areas were kept under control in the superstate, and were treated as constituting Oriental nations even though they culturally seen were outside the civilization. Often they were what the Greek and Chinese would term barbarians, i.e. people outside all civilizations, perhaps semi-nomadic peoples.

 

This pattern of settlements may be compared to Old China in the Shang and Zhou Dynasties and later. Here too the civilized people lived in isolated cities among barbarians. But in this case the areas controlled were not as large. Therefore the barbarians gradually became fully and permanently assimilated.

 

Compared to this the very quick expansion by the Greeks under Alexander the Great into the Middle East and parts of India and Central Asia looks more like the Oriental pattern. Also here isolated Greek enclaves “Alexandrias” were placed all around with large not hellenized areas between them. This process may have been aided by the fact that the invaded territories were parts of the early Oriental civilization. The peoples here were already prepared to the Oriental type of patchwork nations. The Greeks were another civilization, but they were perceived and received as just another nation. Much like the Persians had earlier received the Jews to let them live in small enclaves spread in their empire.

 

Later the Arabs and allied peoples repeated the deed of Alexander. In this case the effect was more lasting, but despite this not all of the conquered areas were fully and permanently culturally assimilated. Therefore some would return to more or less barbaric forms.

 

To sum up: The Oriental type of nation consisted and partly still consists of a people spread among other such nations in geographically separate, but culturally and politically united enclaves. This pattern can be generalized to also concern the relation to peoples from other civilization. Either in the form of Oriental nations having enclaves in other civilizations or in the form of people from other civilizations living in enclaves in the Oriental world, enclaves which in the Oriental context are perceived as parts of Oriental nations.

 

But it can also be generalized in a similar way to not civilized peoples which can live in enclaves or have enclaves of civilized Oriental peoples  inn their areas.

 

 

AFGHANISTAN

As the Oriental civilization flourished under the Abbasid Caliphate 750-1258, the peoples in the vast conquered areas could become more or less incorporated into the higher culture. And later again some of them could fall back into barbaric conditions.  

 

The latter destiny befell numerous areas during the history of this civilization, also as early as during its flourishing times. Even the original heartland of Islam, the Arab Peninsula fell partly into barbaric conditions very soon after the Arab expansion. This semi-barbaric condition has continued to exist up to the present time, where it manifests itself in the directly anti-cultural attitudes of unofficial and official Wahhabism.  It is even more clear in groups like al-Qaeda and the so called Islamic State. 

 

Parts of Syria and Iraq have gone out of and again into barbaric conditions, conditions which has given rise to not least the Islamic State. Parts of North Africa, notably Libya have also become re-barbarized.

 

Afghanistan is another example. A thousand years ago Afghanistan was one of the higher centers of Islamic culture. Science, art and literature flourished not least under the Samanid dynasty. The modern condition of the country in these times also manifested itself in other ways. For example the area was filled with leftwing social revolutionaries. 

 

The high level of culture continued for a couple of centuries, but later the area fell partly back into barbaric conditions. This is what we still see represented today in the form of often Pashtun groups like the Taliban.

 

Of course Afghanistan did not return to totally barbaric pre-civilization conditions. Also elsewhere in the Oriental world the process was only partial except for areas in parts of Africa that were very distant. “Barbaric” is not an ideal word. It has too many negative connotations, and it may give ideas of nomadic peoples in the deep forests or the steppe, peoples which have never seen civilization or culture. Of course this is not the case for the peoples I am talking about here. Rather, they are in a condition where they to some extent have reverted to traditions and styles of life and behavior dating back to times before they were civilized. And very often they consciously resist and oppose civilizing influences, both from their own original and other civilizations. They may also destroy cultural artifacts from civilized times. This can be seen in the destruction of mausoleums for Islamic saints in Saudi Arabia and Sahara. The bombing of Buddhist statues in Afghanistan and the destruction by IS of museums and historical ruins in Iraq and Syria are other examples.

 

Not all parts of Afghanistan are affected to the same extent by the anti-civilization trend. It seems to mostly concern the Pashtun areas in the south and also parts of Northwest Frontier Province in Pakistan. Other parts of Afghanistan have been and are more open to the World. And as a result of the modernization and the westernization introduced by the Russians and the West, not least the cities  have become quite like modern cities elsewhere in the Middle East and the World.

 

Seen in the Oriental cultural context these cities are perceived as enclaves of a more modern partly Westernized nation located as islands in a different and semi-barbaric nation. 

 

As said, in the original Oriental world a coexistence between different nations in a patchwork was natural. But with a partial adaption to Western forms, the Oriental nations want to transform into territorially coherent nations. This is also the case for the anti-civilized parts of Afghanistan even though they are partly outside the Oriental civilization.

 

For this reason the Taliban wants to conquer and eradicate the enclaves of the more modern nation in not least the cities, but also elsewhere. Of course this is amplified as they are now also seen as elements of an alien civilization. The Shias as a third nation are threatened for the same reasons.

 

Obviously the fulfillment of this wish to eradicate the modern enclaves  is becoming much easier now when America and its allies have decided to remove their military forces. In the light of the present analysis this American decision will go down into history as a major moral and strategic mistake.

 

Is a solution for Afghanistan possible? The country contains two big nations (if we include the Shias in the non-Taliban one). There are opponents of Taliban both in the cities and elsewhere, not least in the North. Therefore civil war will continue also after the victory of Taliban. The best solution may be a division of the country with a more modern northern nation and a semi-barbaric nation in the south. If necessary a certain amount of mutual ethnic cleansings must be accepted in order to clarify the borderline.

 

But right now we in the Western civilization have a moral obligation to save or evacuate the modernized people in the enclaves we have planted or promoted and not betray them! And we should certainly not let petty racism hinder us from helping people who have helped us!

The Langoliers are coming!

 

After the election of President Biden there was a deep breath of relief. Everything seems to be back on track. To a large extent we proceed with politics as in the good old days. But beneath the surface there are threatening developments underway. Developments which will make Trumpism resurge. 

 

In a small TV series the Langoliers were monsters having the task of devouring the world we left minutes ago.  Political monsters are likewise   presently devouring America’s old political world.

 

(Do not see the series because of political or historical interest!).

 

As written numerous times, the developments in civilizations are only in broad terms determined by the parallels which can be extracted by comparing the different civilizations.

 

The more specific developments are linked to the specific characteristics of the specific civilization or decided by coincidences, often in the form of decisions. Of these coincidences some can have impacts which are so big that they can be considered as world historical. They bring about a large unexpected deviation from the course prepared by the previous developments. In some cases such world historical coincidences may even cause a deviation from the path laid out by the overall commonalities between the civilizations. 

 

In this connection it is important to underline that I am talking about the developments within civilizations in their dynamic and constantly evolving centuries which last about 1500 years, in the case of our European-Global civilization from roughly 1000 to 2500. In this period developments are strongly driven by internal dynamics. After this period a civilization goes into late periods, where they are not deeply and strongly changed by internal dynamics. Thus what I am talking about here are events that affect a civilization in its dynamic period and which alter the path otherwise determined largely by internal drives. These path-changing events and developments are what I term world historical.

 

The types of events range from unexpected internal developments over natural disasters to invasions. The resulting changes range from moderate to devastating. The Meso-American civilization was drastically affected by as much as two world historical events: the natural disaster in the 9th century and the Spanish invasion with the resulting infections in the 16th century.

 

In our case the human-caused climate changes can become an example of a devastating world historical event. In this post I will talk about another disastrous, though less devastating (as we may hope) example from our civilization.

 

I am talking about the present developments within the GOP. The (first?) presidency of Donald Trump seemed destined to be a phenomenon which was extreme, but only ephemeral. The president’s lack of knowledge and consistency should limit the depth of his impact. Therefore what is much more important than the person is how the Republican Party develops as reaction to him and his rule. They could have reacted by somehow leaving him behind and reverting to their previous policies and habits. These habits were already politically declined, but not more as could be expected at our present stage of late modernity. 

 

But the way the GOP is presently making itself dependent on the former president because of his unbelievable popularity among a  segment of the voters is a truly world historical development.  More and more political opportunism, wish for positions, money and power outweigh moral, knowledge, intelligence and wisdom. 

- The views of Republican politicians are no longer political in the strict sense of the word. Instead they blindly follow a leader with popular appeal, or their opinions are simply derived by assuming the opposite of the opinions of the Democratic Party.

- The belief in and propagation of conspiracy theories will destroy the confidence in legitimate democratic changes of power.

- Even more threatening are the openly anti-democratic attacks on votes already cast and not least the limitations of voting rights. Parts of America are approaching the conditions  of Belarus…

 

It is these developments which are world historical. They were not necessary, and they will alter the path of our late modernity. Developments like these were likely to occur also without the present change of the Republican Party, but not until much later in this century. Thus the world historical in the present degradation of the GOP is that it sets in decades before expected. This will send out rings of destabilization through America and the World.

 

Right now it is Donald Trump who is taking over the Republican Party. In his election campaign and his presidency he bypassed the party by talking directly with the party voters. As said, in itself this could have been merely ephemeral. The lasting world historical change is due to the fact that the GOP does not handle the situation by regaining its voters and putting the disastrous former president in a parenthesis. Instead the party is adapting to the misled voters and their mob ruler. This will set a lasting precedence. From now on the party will merely be a tool for demagogic leaders connected directly to the mobs.

 

This development will prematurely destabilize the United States. Power will be attained and retained by undemocratic and unconstitutional, partly violent means. International politics will be greatly affected. The leaders in the DisUnited States will compete in being tough against rival powers and against smaller countries perceived as annoying. Allies will be trampled down. The world could indeed become bifurcated. We see these developments already now. Even the present US administration is engaging in statements, declarations and acts which go dangerously close to or beyond the limits of the classical diplomacy which they want to restore. 

 

It may be pleasing for some world leaders to see the United States destroying its democracy. But the idea of democracy is harmed by malfunctioning democracies, not by openly “Belarusian” suppression of it in some US states. 

 

And as its population is young, growing and dynamic, America  despite its internal troubles  will have an advantage over countries with old and dwindling populations.

 

Needless to say, the world historical development initiated by a GOP without moral will aggravate the world  historical impact from climate change. If you think that scientific questions concerning Covid-19 and global warming can be determined by political decisions, our civilization is  approaching medieval conditions.

Xi ad Portas

   

In psychodynamics projective  identification is a mechanism, where not only one projects feelings and characteristics onto somebody else, but also that the other person accepts the projected as part of him- or herself.

 

This mechanism seems to be in play in int’l politics of present declining modernity. The big powers accuse each other of having certain characteristics. The accused most often deny having this feature, but at the same time they often in their acts confirm that they are as their opponents postulate. Instead of proving that the accusations are wrong, it is as if the accused through their acts say: We will prove you right.

 

Just to take a few of the numerous examples we have the suppression of the work of opposition groups and of NGO’s with foreign links in Russia and the imposition of disproportionate security laws in Hong Kong. The United States has the last four years  under Donald Trump and the Republicans worked very hard to prove that the accusations from the opponents (and the fears from the friends) are right. Just to take a couple of examples we have the ending of weapon control treaties and the measures against Chinese IT companies and one of their leaders.

 

On the issue of China this line is continuing under the new US administration. The animosity against this new rival is the only thing which unites the madly polarized parties in America. The anti-Chinese sentiments in the United States are reaching hysterical levels. The Trumpists presently taking over the Republican party are reviving the conspiracy theory about the Corona virus coming from the lab in Wuhan. And this in ways which are often beyond any reality. If somebody accuses Dr. Faucy of having hired the lab in Wuhan to produce more dangerous Corona viruses it is approaching pathological paranoia.

 

As we know, the mild version of the lab leak theory assumes that SARS-CoV-2 is a man-made virus which escaped from the lab by accident. The virus is supposed to have been produced through manipulation of another bat virus using  “gain of function” research deliberately or accidentally amplifying a related virus. This might sound like a reasonable idea. But RaTG13, the closest known relative of the Corona-virus in the pandemic has only 96.2 % genetic overlap with the virus causing the illness. This is a gap of almost 4 % which according to scientists cannot be bridged, neither by gain of function techniques nor by a pure accident creating mutations in a lab. Similar arguments exclude manmade alterations of the earlier suggested bat viruses ZC45 and ZXC21as the origin of the pandemic. Thus these versions of the lab escape theory must be discarded. 

 

Therefore to maintain the lab leak idea, it is necessary to assume a longterm diabolic plan aiming at genetically producing the Corona-virus now ravaging the globe, an almost impossible task. It would also be necessary that this genetic alteration was done without leaving traces, which is also extremely difficult.

 

But with the present cold war hysteria in the United States everything about China is believed, even the idea of such a farfetched diabolic plan. The situation is very comparable to the conspiracy theories in Rome about the competitor Carthage 2100 years ago. These theories even continued after the defeat of Cartage and ultimately lead to its deliberate destruction by Rome.

 

In this atmosphere it is no wonder that hate-crimes against Asians are on the rise in America, even though attacking Asians in general because of China is just as stupid as attacking Jews in general because of Israel. What about an upgrade of your educational system?

 

Placed in a such anti-Chinese environment and confronted by grotesque  theories it is no wonder that Dr. Faucy and President Biden to fend off accusations of complicity or appeasement publicly support further investigation off the Wuhan lab theory.

 

Often humans use a rule of thumb, a heuristic saying that the truth is somewhere in the middle between the opposite viewpoints. In their statements concerning the lab theory Biden and Faucy follow this rule. In many cases it is a good heuristic. But the truth is not in the middle between a paranoid conspiracy theory and a neutral viewpoint. And this even less if the last viewpoint is based on science. Of course scientists can disagree on theories, and some scientists may support a theory about a manmade Corona-virus. BUT all scientists agree that theories must be judged on the basis of knowledge and data and not out of public or political opinion.

 

Besides, this rule of thumb about the truth in the middle does not seem to be used by many Americans except for Biden and Faucy. The truth is more and more typically assumed to be at one of the extreme ends in US politics. This new heuristic is an immensely dangerous threat to democracy.

 

The rest of the world still often uses the mentioned truth-in-the-middle-rule. As said, this can also be misleading if one viewpoint is extreme, and the other is neutral. Concerning the topic in this post the rule lends a certain credibility to a version of the Wuhan lab theory. If somebody claims that an epidemiological devil resides in Beijing while others say this is not the case, the truth is assumed to be in the middle. Thus there must at least be a smaller epidemiological demon in Beijing. 

 

 And if China is perceived as a Communist dictatorship suppressing democracy and as not cooperating fully with investigations into the origin of the virus, the global public opinion and the world’s media and politicians are more likely to believe myths about Corona despite their implausibility.

 

 Biden in his  diplomatic foreign policy only wants to confront China in one third of the aspects of the relationship. We must wait and see if this will suffice in his polarized nation obsessed with China.

 

Be assured, if reelected the Chosen One will expel the Devil in all his aspects from the World.

 

Democracy - Ideology or Idea?

  Increasingly the term democracy and its definition is becoming a major battleground in the rivalry and competition between the West and its major opponents. In this post I will try to clarify the concept in light of civilizations and history. 

 

Clearly democracy can be defined in numerous ways. We may understand it as any direct or indirect involvement of the people or parts thereof in either legislation and / or the conduct of governing, the control of this or the replacement of rulers. Or simply that rulers in any way embody or implement the wishes of the people.  

 

Understood in this broad sense we observe elements of democracy in many civilizations. Only to mention a few examples, before or in early stages of some civilizations we often see that on the level of villages or on higher levels the inhabitants together decide in matters of common interest based on voting. On the local level this system often continues through the history of civilizations. In bigger cities in many civilizations the merchants and guilds often decided for themselves in matters important for the city. In old China even according to Confucian thought the people had the right to depose bad rulers. The same was the case for infidel rulers in the Muslim world.

 

In this post I am talking about democracy in the specific sense characterizing the European civilizations. That is the greco-Roman and the present Western civilization. 

 

In earlier posts I have been using the term “Western” in the sense meaning our present civilization in general, not in the sense of the specific political system in the European and North American parts of this Western civilization. The rest of the world has arrived in and is now part of this western civilization. This indeed also concerns the ideological opponents of the Western powers.

 

But to avoid confusion I will in the remainder of this post instead of the Western civilization talk about the “Euro-Global civilization” or simply the “Global civilization ”. The compound is constructed in parallel to the term Greco-Roman civilization. In both cases the first geographical term denotes the place of origin, and the second the later spread of the civilization. Thus in this post “Western” has its normal political sense and refers to West Europe, North America and Japan.

 

Democracy in the Greco-Roman civilization and the Euro-Global civilization has certain characteristics implying a continuous participation of the public or its representatives in and the control of legislation and the running of government, not only the right to insurrection against bad rulers. I term this form of democracy simply “European democracy”, because it characterizes democracy in the two civilizations, which originated in Europe.

 

Clearly European democracy can be practiced in several ways from the direct democracy in the Swiss cantons to the present representative democracy. Also in the course of the history of the two civilizations the implementation of democracy in the sense of the word meaning rule by demos, the people has been practiced to very different degrees. For example on the state level it was de facto more or less absent under the old Greek tyrants and under the absolute rule of the West European kings roughly 1650 to 1800 or later. 

 

What is crucial is that fully implemented or not, we are talking about European democracy as an idea, a principle, which is all-pervading in these two civilizations. Also under tyrants and absolute ruling kings this principle was officially still valid, and it was being practiced albeit in a very limited way. Even under kings like Louis XVI we saw that despite his “L’état c’est moi” the local estates still had powers to approve or disapprove laws. The idea of European democracy is also found in most ideologies of the Euro-Global civilization. “Communism” as the postulated original society and as the utopian end-goal in Marxism is yet another version of European democracy, maybe best compared to the Swiss direct democracy.

 

Thus European democracy is not simply a present arbitrary ideological concept constructed by Western powers even though it is not only used where it is appropriate to criticize internal and external authoritarian tendencies, but also used and abused in the fight against other powers.

 

Important today is how the pervasive idea of European democracy is defined. Clearly it is not per definition equal to present day’s specific form of democracy in Europe and North America, a form focused on polarization and populist arguments propagated with means payed by enormous sums of money. But at least the defining characteristic, the continuous participation in and control of government and legislation by the people or its elected representatives, this principle is generally seen as meaning democracy in the sense used in the Euro-Global civilization. This has become the ideal the presence or the absence of which determines whether we are talking about democracy or not. Not only Western governments, but global public opinion agree on this.

 

Like many other observers I have often talked about democracy today being in decline and under attack from populists and demagogues. No doubt democracy in the meaning of European democracy will be reduced in the next 100 years. In the end it will be practiced mainly on the local level. BUT the idea will remain, and it will be practiced not only locally, but also occasionally on higher levels of the upcoming empires.

 

If our Global civilization develops like our predecessors the internal and external conflicts of late modernity will around 2100 be terminated by one or two, perhaps three empires under the absolute and hereditary rule by one man. In the Greco-Roman civilization this man was of course Augustus. In most civilizations this ruler is from the start viewed upon as king of kings or emperor or something like it. But in the European civilizations a such title is not appropriate because of the strong principle of democracy. Augustus was from the start not seen as an emperor. Instead he had very republican titles. The same was the case for his followers. These republican titles only gradually became equivalent to what we view as emperor. The idea of democracy was for a long time after 30 BC too strong to permit an openly monarchic position. Something like this could have provoked insurrections as late as a century after the accession of Augustus. Officially the people continued to rule. Later the emperors did become monarchs also in the official understanding, and they were accepted as such by the public. But still as late as in the 6th century corresponding to the 27th century in our civilization, we find that the people had a say in politics. The so-called circus parties in the major cities of the East Roman Empire were a mixture of fan-clubs and political parties. They supported their teams in the arenas of sport entertainment. But they also focused their attention to political matters with opposing views. Or they could even unite and depose an emperor. This shows the longevity of the idea of democracy in the European civilizations.

 

No doubt an openly undemocratic monarchy will be just as unthinkable in our Euro-Global civilization even as late as 2200. The empire(s) must continue to resemble a democracy.

 

Thus despite democracy declining and being reduced on the practical level the idea has and will continue to have an immense power. The public opinions in the present Euro-Global civilization, both the elites and the broad masses are firmly attached to this idea. If it is suppressed they will fight very strongly to defend it. This even in the present era’s politically often indifferent atmosphere. In fact European democracy can only be diminished by its own decline. If it is directly attacked, the idea flourishes and will continue to inspire uprisings and revolutions. This has been so since the French Revolution, and it continues to be the case in our time in uprisings like the Arab Spring and the present one in Myanmar. Direct suppression of European forms of democracy is and will remain the strongest promoter for this idea. And as this civilization covers the entire globe, this is the case in most countries.

 

Thus the idea of European style democracy is not simply an ideological construct created by modern Western powers, and it is certainly not going to die despite its decline on the practical level. To be accepted and respected by rulers and peoples in the Global civilization you must at least seem to practice parts of European democracy or as a minimum respect it. You should certainly not be seen as directly suppressing it, even less do this in an excessive manner. This is even more the case if you want to win over this civilization.

 

I am not implying that authoritarian rule is per definition condemnable. Used in a measured degree it can be necessary to maintain stability when this is under threat. This fact should be recognized, also by the Western powers even though it may be difficult to understand by the public. Dictatorships are not always simply dictatorships. There are necessary authoritarian rules, and there are dictatorships serving only personal greed for power. The West must make this distinction. Its opponents also. Because you in your own country suppress European democracy in order to maintain stability you do not have to support all sorts of dictators only hungry for personal power and brutally suppressing their peoples. You will risk to be judged by the world like it judges those you support. 

 

Above I have argued that European democracy is a very basic idea and not only an ideological construct used by Western powers. It is a strong idea with a long past and a long future. 

 

I have defined European democracy in a way relating to legislation and rule. But the total lists of human rights issued over the centuries of the modernity of the Euro-Global civilization rightly contain other things as well, not least the right to well-being. And in a broader sense we can talk about a right to personal space, the right to realize oneself, ones interests and potentials, the freedom to choose not only your leaders, but also and not least your own way of life. To get a true picture of the level of human rights in a country all this must be taken into consideration. Revolutions can start because of lack of democracy, but very often they start because of poverty or lack of personal choice. 

 

The importance of stability and the fulfillment of other rights alongside European democracy is often ignored by the West when judging other countries.

 

The immense importance of the idea of European democracy in the Global civilization is often ignored by the opponents of the Western powers when they navigate in this civilization which they have entered.