Sharansky faults Bush on democracy

[DemFromMem]

While I admire Sharansky for his human rights history, his positions in recent years as a Likud leader have not been to my liking. But I think he is calling it right on Bush's failure in the Middle East. Free elections without laying the foundation for democracy, often result in civil wars and the elections of tyrants.


http://www.jta.org/page_view_breaking_story.asp?intid=1671&ref=daily_briefing

Natan Sharansky said President Bush’s policy of democratization has failed because Bush is rushing tyrannies to elections.

Bush repeatedly has cited Sharansky, a former Prisoner of Zion and former Israeli Cabinet minister, in touting democratic reforms in the Arab world.

“Despite what I believe to be the president’s genuine commitment to promote sweeping change, the policy shift hasn’t matched the rhetoric, with one glaring exception: an intense focus on holding elections everywhere as quickly as possible,” Sharansky wrote Sunday in the Los Angeles Times. “This has been a mistake because, although elections are part of the democratic process, they are never a substitute for it.”

One result of the policy, Sharansky said, was the victory of Hamas, a terrorist group, in Jan. 25 Palestinian Authority legislative elections. Instead of rushing elections, he said, the focus should be on building and protecting a free society. “The recent election of Hamas is the fruit of a policy that focused on the form of democracy rather than its substance,” he said.

[bluestateguy]

1. Those Neo-cons can take those purple fingers and ram them up their asses

nt

[MadisonProgressive]

2. All 10 million of then? HOO-AHHHH!!!!!!!!

[not systems]

3. Translation "democracy not good for Arabs"...

they just need a good grind of the "freedom" boot.

[Boojatta]

4. Did Sharansky ever say that Arabs in Turkey should not get to vote?

Translation "democracy not good for Arabs"... they just need a good grind of the "freedom" boot.

[DemFromMem]

5. I don't think the Turks consider themselves Arabs

[not systems]

6. Turkey is populated by Turks and Kurds...

with Arabs making up a tiny minority.

Whatever.

[Boojatta]

7. A tiny minority that, according to Sharansky, should not get to vote?

[not systems]

8. Why defend Sharansky?

He didn't think Russians should wait and not rush to vote after the USSR collapsed.

He is an untranationalist neocon poster boy for "Democracy(C)".

You can be obtuse as well as incorrect if you want but Sharansky's
idea of democracy has nothing to do with all people voting.

I remember Bush reading his ideological screed a couple of years
back when he was vacationing at the pig farm. Getting information
on how to democratize the mideast.

Joy.

More kids dying for the neocon delusions of "securing the realm".

[Boojatta]

9. Sharansky is guilty of writing a book?

Why defend Sharansky?

Defend him against what? I'm simply trying to understand what he is accused of and the basis for that accusation.

He didn't think Russians should wait and not rush to vote after the USSR collapsed.

Assuming that you are right about that, would you say that Sharansky was revealing a pro-Slavic racial bias?

What was Sharansky's point of view regarding Milosevic? If Sharansky said that it was right for various countries to force Milosevic from power even though Milosevic had been elected, then was Sharansky revealing an anti-Serbian racial bias?

[not systems]

10. Defend him against...

me pointing out that he doesn't believe in one person one vote.

[norml]

11. Sharansky should blame himself

for helping to sell this PNAC Neo-Con garbage.

[Boojatta]

12. Speaking of Milosevic...

What was Sharansky's point of view regarding Milosevic? If Sharansky said that it was right for various countries to force Milosevic from power even though Milosevic had been elected, then was Sharansky revealing an anti-Serbian racial bias?

I mentioned Milosevic and look what happened. Which massacre mastermind should I mention next?

[bemildred]

13. Talk about Bush.

It's a long shot, but what if it works?

[heirs_of_liberty]

14. Democracy is merely majority fascism, it's NOT Republican Liberty

Our forefathers replaced established conservative religious-socialist Fascist persecution (Tory Anglicanism), Noble Imperial Privatism (conservative deified Nobility), and Mercantile 'Christian coalition' Cabalism (elitist monopolist conservative Whig Cabals) with a new system of governance ruled by the liberal 'Monarch' of an anointed paper "Constitution of Liberty" where Liberal legislatures representing it's regions and populations (as Republicans) would debate the Liberal Socialist and Liberal Privatist aspects of legislative issues to form a more perfect union where 'democracy' could be limited to positive, rational and constructive accomplishment, individuals could be different and yet still free, and none need fear conservative persecution for their dogmatic, doctrinal personal or religious socialist beliefs.

The genius of Republics of Liberty is pacific, for where dogmatic, doctrinal proselytizing (conservative religious socialism/Marxist socialism) cannot interfere with political policy governed by Liberty, intransigent conservative socialist hatreds cannot be exploited to engineer conflict internally or externally. The most unfortunate problem in our history was that Whig Christianism survived in the south as a political justification for slavery. Second to that, the Cold War against Godless Socialism in USSR was exploited by 'Godful' Socialists here to legitimize their hateful and unconstitutional political agendas!

Liberty is a constant battle and a stern taskmaster, but it alone is the genius and guardian of all human freedom!

There was also to be a 'well-regulated' Free Market System to prevent elite Mercantile Monopolist Cabalists from stifling competitivity, exploiting wealth and progress, and blackmailing governments but that died with America's surrender to Churchill at Potsdam. (CIA Mafia of Foreign Vice, and later, the "Global Economy" - LOL)

There can be no such thing as meaningful 'democracy' in a nation that lacks an iron-clad Constitution of Liberty to protect minorities, and any nation based upon the establishment of a single, monolithic, hateful religious-socialist tyranny will never be any more than a Fascist Empire of Tyranny.

"Today Christians rule Germany! I pledge that I never will tie myself to parties who want to destroy Christianity .. We want to fill our culture again with the Christian spirit ... We want to burn out all the recent immoral developments in literature, in the theater, and in the press - in short, we want to burn out the poison of immorality which has entered into our whole life and culture as a result of liberal excess..." - *The Speeches of Adolph Hitler, 1922-1939,