Democracy - 2004

Ralf Peters reflects on a year frought with frustration, struggle and anxiety within the world's democratic movement. However, he sees the silver lining:

The "experts" assured us that elections couldn't, wouldn't and shouldn't work in Afghanistan. Afghans had no tradition of democracy. They were illiterate, tribal fundamentalists resistant to foreign ideas. Grass-roots support for the Taliban, widespread violence and fear were going to frustrate the American folly of believing that Afghans cared about elections.

What happened? In cities and remote villages the people of Afghanistan ignored grave dangers and turned out to vote by the millions. Desperate to find fault, international critics could cite only minor flaws. And the Afghans elected a rule-of-law president, not a tribal warlord.

Afghanistan still faces daunting problems, but little more than three years ago it suffered under one of the world's most oppressive regimes, harbored thousands of terrorists and, according to the same experts, could never be subdued by American troops. Now it has a freely elected government — and hope.

Democracy is about the little guy having a voice. Afghanistan's little guys — and gals — took a stand to have their voices heard.

TODAY, the people of Ukraine are turning out to vote in massive num bers. After a dozen years of post-Soviet corruption and stasis, average citizens decided they'd had enough. They took to the streets in masses last month, protesting a stolen election. Defying homegrown thugs and Russia's president, they demanded freedom and real democracy.

Romania's reform-minded voters got little attention from a press that craves bad news, while Australia's common-sense support for Prime Minister John Howard repulsed the international literati. Spaniards didn't vote the way we would have liked, but they voted fervently as they continued to master the power of representative government after a single generation of democracy.

Democracy doesn't bring tranquility; only dictators are capable of that. Michael Moore was able to film children flying kites in Iraq because anyone with an opposing voice found their way into a mass grave along with their family. The Taliban routinely shot dissenters in public arenas. The alternative in democracy, however, is the loss of this tranquility due the increase in dissent from many different angles. The little guy gets his voice and, shocking to the elites, tends to moderate extremist movements. Peters explains:

Around the world, electoral trends over the past few years upset the doomster predictions of the pundits. Despite solemn warnings that Indonesia or even Malaysia might "go fundamentalist" at the polls, elections in both of these crucial Muslim states resulted in resounding defeats for parties seeking to wield Islam as a weapon.

Again and again, "uneducated" and "unsophisticated" voters chose decency, progress and opportunity over the pleasures of hatred and blame.

Peters then correctly points out that we do not need to look a world away to see the fruits to democracy. The little guys scored a victory at home too:

ON-LINE commissars, network anchors, faculty-lounge commandos and the infernally self-righteous George Soros rallied behind Michael Moore to denounce George W. Bush for liberating tens of millions of human beings, for taking the War on Terror to the terrorists and for speaking like an average guy, not in the smarmy tones of Harvard Yard.

The result? The American people turned out in record numbers to re-elect a man who respects their labor and faith, who believes that freedom is worth fighting for and who knows that our country is a force for good.

No wonder campus lefties hate democracy. It gives the high-school graduate the same power as the guy with the Ph.D. It offers an identical vote to those who work with their hands and those who never broke a sweat in their trust-funded lives. And it grants the same Election Day authority to the clerk behind the counter as it does to the customer waving the platinum credit card.

Democracy is the ultimate weapon of social justice.

Indeed, it is "the ultimate weapon of social justice," but also a painful process. I almost went insane with the banter that surrounded the 2004 election. The media, the pundits, the mudslinging, the campaign ads, etc., all screaming at the unassuming public about why our vote should go to their guy. Yet for me, it was privilege going to the polls to vote for the guy who I thought should lead the country, while then meeting a friend, who voted for the other guy, for beers afterwards. We debated, shook hands and then ordered another Guiness. Mmmm, Guiness, the great moderator...

Iraq is next on the democracy watchlist. Read the rest of Peter's article to get his take on the Iraqi elections. I only want to add one thing: the same peanut gallery that had shouted at us for the past year about the grave consequences of election George Bush, is now providing their collective Chicken Little commentary on the upcoming Iraqi elections. However, the world's latest examples show us that when people have the will to stick with it, democracy is powerful, liberating and suprisingly moderate.

Strangely, for all the talk of not going into Iraq with a plan, this is precisely what we had set out to do.