Can Arab nations live in a democracy?

Are Arab nations capable of living in a democracy?

  • Yes!

    Votes: 8 38.1%
  • No.

    Votes: 6 28.6%
  • I'm not sure, lets debate...

    Votes: 7 33.3%

  • Total voters
    21
I think IMO that these country's need an Iron Fist. It seems to me when we bring democracy it only makes them more a threat. Islam is like in a time capsule probably where Christians were 1000 years ago they never advance and cling to the old ways. While training to fight in Iraq we learned that Iraq to Iraqi's is at the bottom of what they hold dear. How can you have democracy with no sense of Nation?
 
Is democracy overrated?

Democracy is championed as a universal good by the West, but we over-estimate its power to guarantee personal and political freedom, argues Roger Scruton.

"In my view, the idea that there is a single, one-size-fits-all solution to social and political conflict around the world, and that democracy is the name of it, is based on a disregard of historical and cultural conditions, and a failure to see that democracy is only made possible by other and more deeply hidden institutions. And while we are willing to accept that democracy goes hand in hand with individual freedom and the protection of human rights, we often fail to realise that these three things are three things, not one, and that it is only under certain conditions that they coincide."
Read article
 
The difficulty for Arabs in Western countries concerns poor education levels and stringent religious beliefs. A two headed monster that restricts social acclimation capacity.
 
Current events in Egypt prove that democracy is extremly difficult to implement in the Arab world. The young secular-liberal part of the Eyptian anti-MOubarak revolution was too split and unable to win the democratic election.

Instead the well organized Muslim-brotherhood won it and then proved to be undemocratic. The only solution was a military coup.
 
Current events in Egypt prove that democracy is extremly difficult to implement in the Arab world. The young secular-liberal part of the Eyptian anti-MOubarak revolution was too split and unable to win the democratic election.

Instead the well organized Muslim-brotherhood won it and then proved to be undemocratic. The only solution was a military coup.

The media are calling this a military coup, but from what I can see you need a change of power for that to happen. In reality all the army did was remove Mubarak, then entered into a farce. They thought they could hold elections and then use the president as a puppet. Obviously Morsi wasn't willing to play their game and they basically ended the charade. The media are pretending it's a coup but it happened so quickly with so little blood shed it was obvious that the army had never left power in Egypt.

They have been quite clever however, I have read articles proclaiming the Egyptian army as the saviours of the revolution. People who don't like Islam but love democracy are looking a bit stupid right now as they try and figure out what kind of oppression they hate more.:unsure:

As the article debates above Democracy is a high level form of government you need a lot of fundamental social and political linch pins in place for it to stand a chance. From what I can see in the Middle East they have very few if any of these frame works that are solid enough to build upon. I think they need to be left to find their own way, this I think unfortunately is probably going to be a bloody process, Western intervention seems only to create complications and accusation that Europeans and Americans are the route cause of the problem. If anything should be learned from this I think it's not to hold Democracy as the holy grail of social evolution and to accept that other racial groups should be left alone to develop their own systems and cultural ideas.
 
As long us Christians and Muslims can work together peacefully then I don't think there could be a problem
 
Arabs nations have too many internecine conflicts and manifest a propensity to downplay democracy in their socio-political worlds.
 
It is enough to look how difficult was the birth of democracy in Europe after WWI to see, that what is going on in middle east, is nothing unusual for young democracies, or any nation during change of political system. Remember history of Germany, Spain or Russia at this time period? Not mentioning many other european countries and their march towards democracy.
And look at Russia, it is still not fully democratic or tolerant and it is in Europe!

Democratisation of Middle East will happen together with economic development. The richer people get, the more freedoms and rights they demand. If they stay poor we will see mess, revolutions and dictatorships.
 
Only when the Muslim religion becomes less draconian will there be a reasonable chance for Arabs to accept democracy. Not likely to happen anytime soon.
 
In many ways democracy is a just a kind of rolling dictatorship.
Most countries have a few parties that are pretty much set in stone and 2-3 parties that take 80% of the vote.
While these parties change leaders they are rarely challenged in power by outside organisations (eg protest parties).

Who gets to decide on the leaders of the these parties, who gets to decide who the candidates are, who decides on their policies?
In the UK Labour, Conservatives and Lib Dems all offered public cuts although I imagine if you could poll the entire population directly on 'Do you want cuts to the public sector?' the overwhelming result would be no.

In the UK a Cambridge/Oxford education is a minimum qualification to be a political leader, already we are talking about a set power structure that is designed to keep certain people from power. One way or another hierarchy will manifest itself, we like to kid ourselves we live in a free open society but its just a perception of putting a ballot paper in a box that makes people think they have any say in the running of their country. Once in power political parties generally push through whatever they feel like.

They have done research that people are only bothered about wealth dependant on how rich they feel in relation to others in society, e.g. discontent about your wealth is dependant on your perception of where you sit in the hierarchy and the distance between the top and the bottom. One of the misconceptions about wealth, that many politicians like to play on is that there are loads of rich people to tax. Reality is millionaires are a very small percentage of the population and even heavy tax programmes on them would do little to bolster most government's balance sheets (as has been discussed in France on the 75% tax).

Anyway enough waffle, I think the Arab world is in a terrible place, I don't think their societies are compatible with Western ideas about democratic systems, which I think is fine. They should be left to figure out a system that works for them. The Chinese are doing alright and they are supposed to be communists.

It's about stability, prosperity and a certain level of freedom, who cares what the idiot in the street has to say about the running of the country. #OverratedDemocracy
 
from what I understand about Arab countries the political elites are usually some group/groups that have been long established and even in places with widely held elections, such as Lebanon, only people from this certain grouping can run for office. In Lebanon the Christians control all of the politics even though the country has overwhelming Muslim majority.It was a system put in place by the French, in Lebanon. Not so sure if it's a matter of legality or more a matter of politico-culture, though.

In other arab countries the situation is similar with a certain political elite running the show all the time. But if you look at Egypt, obviously the people themselves can change the situation if they actually want to bad enough. But it's their choice since it is their nation and the west should stay out of it.


and despite what westerners think, places like Iran do actually have a democratic government in place, especially when compared to other Muslim nations.
They just dont have the specific western form of democracy.
 
With the fall of dictators all over the Arab world, do you think Arab culture is capable of running a democracy?

Should western nations stop trying to empose their values and cultural templates onto people from different cultures?

From recent history, it would seem that Arab countries still have a fair way to go in embracing the democratic process. If one was to include Egypt into this debate, one could only say "NO". As for western countries attempting to impose their values and culture on other different cultures, again I would agree with you. But, in many cases, the erosion of cultures in favour of western models is happening at the behest of the younger generation which is saturated with movies, television, fashion and advertising from the west. You can't blame manufacturers of a new market opens for their product in other cultures.
 
But, in many cases, the erosion of cultures in favour of western models is happening at the behest of the younger generation which is saturated with movies, television, fashion and advertising from the west. You can't blame manufacturers of a new market opens for their product in other cultures.
By the same measure you would need to conclude that feudal and imperialist culture of Europe of 17 and 18 hundreds "eroded" into free and democratic culture of today.
It is hard to blame young people of middle east that they desire more freedom, engagement in politics and to join the middle class of the world.
I can agree that the process and the changes are always messy and scary, and might not be successful at first try or at all. For most of 19 century Europe was in a very messy terrifying state, with tens of millions killed in wars. Why would we even consider that changes in the Middle East (hopefully for the best) can be a quick and peaceful process?
 
LeBrok: I'm not "blaming" the young people, it's a process of evolution. As people become more exposed to other cultures, they select segments that they like and adopt them. As for the Middle East, this area was civilised when most of Europe was still running around in animal skins. One would have expected a far more stable political situation there than in Europe. Personally, I have no view on the pro's and cons of Middle Eastern culture, and I agree that democratisation still seems a long way off.
By the same measure you would need to conclude that feudal and imperialist culture of Europe of 17 and 18 hundreds "eroded" into free and democratic culture of today.
I don't think it was an erosion, more evolution.
 
LeBrok: I'm not "blaming" the young people, it's a process of evolution. As people become more exposed to other cultures, they select segments that they like and adopt them. As for the Middle East, this area was civilised when most of Europe was still running around in animal skins. One would have expected a far more stable political situation there than in Europe. Personally, I have no view on the pro's and cons of Middle Eastern culture, and I agree that democratisation still seems a long way off. I don't think it was an erosion, more evolution.
Exactly my point too, therefore changes in the Middle East are just an evolution too, and not an erosion due to Western "decadent" influences.
 
Arabs can not have full democracy. At most half democracy. The reason is unreformed Islam. Democracy is not free election only. Iran holds regularly free elections and yet is not democracy. Arabs if free are very productive. I have seen some in US.
 

This thread has been viewed 31201 times.

Back
Top