Posted on 09/19/2007 9:03:58 PM PDT by jazusamo
If nothing else comes out of the Iraq war, it should banish the concept of "nation-building" from our language and our minds. "The track record of nation-building and Wilsonian grandiosity ought to give anyone pause," as was said in this column before the Iraq war began.
We can now add the track record of Iraq to the list of disasters.
The very existence of Iraq is a result of Woodrow Wilson's grandiose ideas about "the right of self-determination of peoples," which led to the dismemberment of the Ottoman Empire by the victorious allied powers after the First World War.
Some of the most bitter and intractable conflicts of our time have arisen in nations carved out of the Ottoman Empire, whether in the Balkans or the Middle East.
You cannot turn a territory and its population into a functioning nation with the stroke of a pen or the drawing of lines on a map.
Real nations evolve over time out of the mutual accommodations of peoples, not by imposing the bright ideas of theorists from the top down.
No small part of African nations' problems comes from the fact that most became nations only in the sense that conquerors carved up African territories among themselves to suit their own convenience.
There was no nation of Nigeria until the British drew some lines on a map and gave it that name. There is no reason to think that such a nation would have evolved on its own, given the mutually antagonistic peoples living in that vast territory.
Iraq is an object lesson in another sense. You seldom hear about the area of the country controlled by Kurds because that has been the most peaceful and orderly part of Iraq, and the media are drawn to death and destruction.
In his insightful new book, "Mugged by Reality," author John Agresto says: "I do not believe one American, soldier or civilian, has been killed or even hurt in Kurdish Iraq since the war began — or maybe ever."
The Kurds are a people. They are not just some folks thrown together by others who drew lines on a map. They had their own leaders before there were any national elections in Iraq.
As Agresto points out, democracy is a means, not an end in itself.
Natan Sharansky's book "The Case for Democracy" argues persuasively for the international, as well as internal, benefits of democracy, seeing it as the kind of government that reduces the dangers of war.
President Bush became an enthusiast for the idea and spent hours talking with Sharansky in the White House.
Perhaps he should have spent a little time talking with Amy Chua, whose book "World on Fire" points out that democracy — in certain kinds of societies — is a recipe for disaster, despite how valuable it has been in Western nations.
Democracy means voting. It does not mean freedom. When we lump the two ideas together, we confuse ourselves and others.
Britain was a free country long before it became democratic. In Germany, Hitler was elected democratically. In much of Africa, democracy in practice has meant, "One man, one vote — one time," as elected leaders put an end to both elections and freedom.
It would be wonderful to have free and democratic nations throughout the world, and that would very likely reduce military conflicts, as Sharansky and others say. But we do not ensure freedom by holding elections.
According to John Agresto, in Iraq "the 'democratic' government now entrenched is as sectarian and incompetent as we ever could have feared." He is unwilling to say that the invasion of Iraq "as originally conceived" was a mistake but he fears that it has become "a tragedy."
This is not a plea for withdrawal. Whatever the situation when we went in, international terrorists have chosen to make this the place for a showdown battle. We can win or lose that battle but we cannot unilaterally end the war. It is the terrorists' war, regardless of where it is fought.
Thomas Sowell is a senior fellow at the Hoover Institute and author of Basic Economics: A Citizen's Guide to the Economy.
If this man would decide to run for POTUS, I would vote twice for him.
You will dig this. Jason at the Young Americans Foundation got in Murtha’s face over the Haditha Marines. Video here
Real freedom takes the form of a Bill of Rights - not a ballot box where elitist egos compete for false glory.
Factually untrue. But like most of this column, Dr Sowell clings to dogmatic assertions of cliches in place of arugeing the case factual.
Thanks for posting that, Johnnie. It’s fantastic and shows Murtha to be the coward he is.
Better there, than here!!!!!!!
This is one of the longest conflicts in history. 1400 years
" upon such of those to whom the Scriptures have been given as believe not in God." Sura 9:29
Taking out Saddam and OBL doesn't change a thing, except leaders. Although on the bright side there are ample promotional opportunities in AQ. You could literally explode your way to the top in no time at all!!!!
“
“Stick to Econ Dr. Sowell. Your are hopelessly, and arrogantly, ignorant about US Strategic Interests and what part Iraq plays in them. You could not be more wrong about Iraq unless you started agreeing with John Kerry.”
—
Hey MNJ,
If I had to choose who to believe, MNJohnnie or Dr. Sowell, it would take me less than a nano-second to conclude that Dr. Sowell could figure out the facts a whole lot better than MNJohnnie.
I might disagree with you on other stuff, but you are correct about ‘ol Adolph. I always put it that “he came to power legally” in the Germany of that time. He was not voted in. (a little problem at the Reichstag helped him consolidate power, of course)
As far as Africa goes, try blaming that silly African tribalism and racisim that never fails to bring a thriving African nation back down into the pits of poverty and starvation when a darkie decides things could be even better if they murdered and boot out whitey, steal all his possessions, destroy the farms and other businesses whitey built that feed the country and provide employment and turn it into a tribal dictatorship.
Then blame whitey and the west for the failed nation.
You got it right, except that Dr. Sowell already knew the facts in the first place.
Someone, anyone, needs to hire this guy, either as a speech writer or advisor.
If they do, they got both my vote and my donations.
NO cheers, unfortunately.
Don't abrogate the koran. Allah is not a word for "god" Allah is the NAME of the Islamic god (ilah). As the Koran states:
Qur'an 20:8 "Allah! There is no Ilah (god) save Him. His are the most beautiful Names. To Him belong the most beautiful attributes."
Qur'an 20:14 "Verily, I am Allah. No Ilah (god) may be worshiped but I. So serve you Me, and perform regular prostration prayer for My praise. Verily the Hour is coming. I am almost hiding it from Myself."
Now, here, we see "Allah"(AKA Satan) talking to the Jews. Here he admits he is not the same God as the Christian/Jewish God of the bible, and tries to tell them to worship him (Satan, the deceiver):
Qur'an 20:96 "Now look at your ilah (god), of whom you have become devoted. We will (burn) it and scatter it in the sea! But your Ilah (god) is Allah: there is no ilah (god) but He. Thus do We relate to you some stories of what happened before from Our own Remembrance."
Don't assist MSM in bluring the lines and their attempts to make the true God of the bible to be the same one as the evil sadistic one of the Koran.
Which it has held since, oh, Hamurabi's time.
As far as “nation building” I think history shows that it only works when you totally distroy the place first. Distroy it to the point that the enemy no longer has the will to fight and instead is looking for his/her next meal.
In other words, it only works when there’s nowhere to go but up.
mega bump. nation building in barbaric cesspools DOES NOT WORK!!! When will the big govt conservatives get that through their thick skulls?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.