04-24-2006, 02:18 PM
hi friends. i'm new to this forum. this is my first post.
i wish to start a discussion on 'forcible democratization' by an ideal democratic state from a purely theoretical point of view (and not with a direct reference to usa, india or any other nation-state 'cos these may not be ideal democracies - but we can quote examples; examples of incorrect behavior also help us understand what is right and wrong). if there already exists a thread that discusses this, please point it here (for my/our reference).
my thoughts: democratic states, in theory, are called upon to be evangelistic (much like some religions). it is one of their 'moral' imperatives. this can be achieved through exhortation, promotion of their gospel, dialogue, sanction, spreading newsletters by helicopters, or through forcible democratization. <b>when </b>forcible democratization, or a just war, is justified is something few scholars have been able to come to an agreement on; otoh there is a lot of literature about how such a state ought to behave <b>after </b>it has forcibly invaded another country to democratize it. i'm not interested in discussing the latter. i'm interested in discussing, i) is this a moral imperative of an ideal secular democratic state? and ii) if yes, what are the preconditions for it's waging a just war or a forcible democratization on another nation-state? and other issues connected with events that precede this theoretical and hypothetical 'just war' or forcible democratization. any links to literature in the net, on this subject, would also be appreciated. for the purposes of this discussion, i'd imagine that an ideal democracy is a 'secular democracy (with a strong federal character if it's constituents are in the shape of a federation).' thus, theoretically, such a state can wage a 'just war' even against a religious democracy if necessary?
i wish to start a discussion on 'forcible democratization' by an ideal democratic state from a purely theoretical point of view (and not with a direct reference to usa, india or any other nation-state 'cos these may not be ideal democracies - but we can quote examples; examples of incorrect behavior also help us understand what is right and wrong). if there already exists a thread that discusses this, please point it here (for my/our reference).
my thoughts: democratic states, in theory, are called upon to be evangelistic (much like some religions). it is one of their 'moral' imperatives. this can be achieved through exhortation, promotion of their gospel, dialogue, sanction, spreading newsletters by helicopters, or through forcible democratization. <b>when </b>forcible democratization, or a just war, is justified is something few scholars have been able to come to an agreement on; otoh there is a lot of literature about how such a state ought to behave <b>after </b>it has forcibly invaded another country to democratize it. i'm not interested in discussing the latter. i'm interested in discussing, i) is this a moral imperative of an ideal secular democratic state? and ii) if yes, what are the preconditions for it's waging a just war or a forcible democratization on another nation-state? and other issues connected with events that precede this theoretical and hypothetical 'just war' or forcible democratization. any links to literature in the net, on this subject, would also be appreciated. for the purposes of this discussion, i'd imagine that an ideal democracy is a 'secular democracy (with a strong federal character if it's constituents are in the shape of a federation).' thus, theoretically, such a state can wage a 'just war' even against a religious democracy if necessary?