free speech and national security

[Non Sequitur]

I can't find a source for this, but I was listening to BBC in America on NPR tonight and it was someone from Eritrea's consulate talking about rights abuses in the country. What was interesting was this person was defending the apparently massive restrictions on free speech in the names of national security. Eritrea is threatened by it's neighbors and the guest was arguing that free speech was significantly harming their war effort. The same argument was also made about elections.

Now, besides the obvious argument we could have about free speech and national security I was more interested in this because the interviewer was appalled (rightly so in my opinion) by the arguments being made by this representative of the Eritrea and the Rep seemed like this was business as usual

So here is my question: how much democracy should we reasonably expect and/or encourage out of a country in this situation? Personally, I would argue that the concepts of democracy, liberty, and personal rights have been evolving in the West for a good 500 years and only very recently have we gotten to a semi-stable period. It seems silly, therefore, to expect a functioning democracy in countries with less experience.

However what role does the West have to play in helping democracies form? Do we have a responsibility to help those who want democracy?

I wish NPR would put that interview online....

[Michael]

It might be helpful for context here to review the limitations put upon free speech in the USA during WW2 for comparison.

[Michael]

I can't find a source for this, but I was listening to BBC in America on NPR tonight and it was someone from Eritrea's consulate talking about rights abuses in the country. What was interesting was this person was defending the apparently massive restrictions on free speech in the names of national security. Eritrea is threatened by it's neighbors and the guest was arguing that free speech was significantly harming their war effort. The same argument was also made about elections.

Now, besides the obvious argument we could have about free speech and national security I was more interested in this because the interviewer was appalled (rightly so in my opinion) by the arguments being made by this representative of the Eritrea and the Rep seemed like this was business as usual

So here is my question: how much democracy should we reasonably expect and/or encourage out of a country in this situation? Personally, I would argue that the concepts of democracy, liberty, and personal rights have been evolving in the West for a good 500 years and only very recently have we gotten to a semi-stable period. It seems silly, therefore, to expect a functioning democracy in countries with less experience.
I'm a strong believer in the "South Korea" model - meaning that I believe that western-style representative democratic systems and rule of law (and elections) don't actually work unless you have a capitalism-based market system.

The capitalism-based market system is not necessary to the system, rather it is necessary to create a sufficiently large enough middle class that can and will operate 'western-style' representative democratic system under the rule of law (and elections) once they as a class are established. Statistically speaking, it seems like a nation has to have between 1/4 and 1/3 of the citizenry with middle-class status and you will get political stability using the representative political model. Without that substantial middle class establishment, the system will not function correctly and the unintened consequences of that are very ugly.

Ergo, I believe that 'pushing' democracy onto various third world nations is a waste of time, energy and resources. Democracy (and the rule of law) take years (decades/centuries) to become established. The process is slow.

As for western policy dealing with such unsavory or repressive regimes, suffice it to say that the west has no real or actual need to deal with these regimes other than in the capacity of seeking to acquire local resources (or peaceful shipping channels) in the first place. That is to say, the west wants things from these people - that gives them power.

However what role does the West have to play in helping democracies form? Do we have a responsibility to help those who want democracy?

I wish NPR would put that interview online....
I say western help should be given, but with reasonable expecations of failure. Eritrea doesn't need our help with 'democracy' - that's just codeword for the west getting what they want. I think Eritrea has way bigger problems there than that. But we should certainly 'help' them along with that as a goal.

Democratic rule and the rule of law cannot be imposed or imported. It just doesn't work. Premature push for democracy just gives democracy a bad name as it will be used to justify the rule of the rapcious elites who do not respect the rule of law or democracy.