Sep 9, 2006 5:49:12 PM cite

Without economic freedom there is no true political freedom. When the power to issue money has been centralized under commercial banks, which create money out of thin air and saddle, people, businesses and govt. with debts...then how are you free??? www.freedomtofascism.com Both communism, corporate fascism and wars are financed by bankers

by Atma

Sep 9, 2006 5:05:05 PM cite

You should divide your question properly. First part of your question implicates why you just observe this behaviour in non-democratical countries. The second part would be why they are behaving like this although we try to help them by spreading our values and political and economical system. Split in 2 parts, we may answer them easier. The public opinion is always contructed by the informations you have access to. Because of the very few, very censored and very simplified informations the people in such countries receive by media and institutionalized education, the only logical consequence for them is to demonstrate and negotiate the ways of the western world. The question I would suggest you to ask yourself is:"How can I be sure to receive all information required to have a complete understanding of this situation?" Regarding your second question, I would say that there is a problem with OUR behaviour to them. When they follow the news, they see things like the Iraqi War, the dead Iraqis, the bombings, the unstability of the whole country. And they ask themselves of course why we always talk about things like freedom, peace and wealth and how you should follow our path to receive them - but DO things like this. The questions you should ask are : "Is this the right way? Are we allowed to stretch our values in the pursuit of a higher reason? Or should we trust in the strenght of our principles and let these countries become democratic by their own? Are we allowed to help them on their way?"

by fenfire

Sep 9, 2006 5:04:37 PM cite

Because no individual likes to be pushed around by others, especially not outside "others". As we have seen in Iraq even the overthrow of a brutal dictator can lead to worse conditions than were preent prior to "democratisation". Folks just want to be left alone. By governments, individuals and especially by others who "know" that they'd be better off under a new regime.

by mrjarrell

Sep 9, 2006 4:50:49 PM cite

not living in fear all the time?the States-the biggest"democracy spreading" power in the world is living in constant fear and is forever on an alert of some kind ("We're safer,but we're no safe" - Bush) because of their attempts at bringing an often terribly corrupt way of life to states and countries that must evolve into democracies by themselves. Democracy was not forced upon the United States or Britain- it was born through inner struggle within the country. These "foreign countries" react so angrily because from theri point of view, and my own, they are being forced into a regime change by another country through the invasion of their own. These shambolic attempts at bringing democracy to countries that are not yet ready for them inevitably involve needless bloodshed, no democracy, civil war and the birth of a whole new generation of so-called terrorists. If another country invaded yours and instigated a regime change and killed your whole family in what is termed "collateral damage", i'm pretty sure you wouldn't stand idly by either.

by sixpart

Sep 9, 2006 4:48:08 PM cite

If you define 'our way of life' as not living in fear, you may need a reality-check. Most current policies of the countires calling themselves democracies, are being formulated out of fear (terrorists, religious fanatics, immegrants, etc.). There is a zenophobic fear of other cultures and how they might effect the world. There is a denial of the fact that most individuals have very little impact on how they are governed and are stampeded into precipitous and often self-destructive action. Corruption of power and money seems to feed on this fear and leaves policies in the hands of self-serving promoters of parties, religions, corporations, etc. Champions of democracy only have the moral right to lead by example and that means a lifetime of perfecting themselves, not imposing a flawed system on the rest of the world.

by pahlrs

Sep 9, 2006 4:23:38 PM cite

Because often those oppressed countries have no infrastrucutre, whether welfare or industry, to a proper extent. To help suppress rebellion, and to unite the nation, dictators often use visible obviously powerful nations, typically the United States, to keep the populace focus elsewhere. It is tactic often shored up with religion, thus creating nationalistic fervor. We aren't even immune to the tactic in the States, the equation is merely reversed.

by jblock

Sep 9, 2006 3:38:53 PM cite

Hello Chris, I have a couple of questions you may want to ask yourself, befor assuming that "the western way of life" it's what it seems to be... - Have you ask your self, who is behind those dictators?? supporting them with money, weapons... among other things? - Is this the only time this things had happend? or does this kind of trying to "spread the western way of life" actually targets some few people interests?? - Why is the western world so interested in "helping" just selected countries? - What would you do if someone gets into your home telling they want to help and suddenly starts taking over to the point that you aren't able to decide your self anymore how to lead your household. You have to ask permission to live your house, and wherever you go, you are been controlled and obseved by people carring guns and been rude to you?? Check this you may find some answers... http://www.rmbowman.com/ssn/terror3.htm

by Sandritita

Sep 9, 2006 2:04:26 PM cite

Who is going to spread our way of life? people that want to make this world a fairer place or people who are interested in creating new markets? Do we accept the ways of others even if we don´t necessarily agree with it, do we understand other ways of life? If we send businessmen we´ll get what businessmen create, we already have to fight for our rights in our societies and most of us grew up in a capitalist society, so we should have a better understanding. We are rich in the western world, yet we play with fears, panics and uncertainty, as if we are constantly struggling. No one in our society should worry about food, housing and medical care. In many so called dictatorships the people either have or not, but they know the enemy. The western world is full of traps and its representatives have no respect for traditional values that have nothing to do with dictatorships but a more helpful and caring society. We spread our way with weapons, but we don´t stand for what we promise, we come to get rid of the dictator only to impose values that go against what people believe in, get the oil, create markets, or establish a pro western government, that supports ideas we currently have, that supports our current values. And whom do we vote for, a Mr. Bush and other ingnorants, or lets say moneymakers. It would not only scare me, but I would try to stop em, cause democracy seems to look good for us, looks good on paper and in propaganda, but what is our intention to "help" and who is trying to "help".

by TTT

Sep 9, 2006 1:32:36 PM cite

Saying that many people in foreign countries are aggressive towards the Western World for wanting to spread democracy and save them from dictatorship is plainly and truly wrong. The majority of these people would gladly welcome democracy wih open arms but, the western world is only interested in bringenmeaning enforcing democracy to a few and selected countries, for reason known only to their Governments. The reason I am saying this is, why choose Irak and do nothing in Zimbabwe? Why Afganistan and not also Sudan? What about Ethiopia? I could go on and on but if you take a second look at the countries mentioned you will probably figure out the answer yourself. People in these countries, meaning some people, then react aggressively because they know that the Western World is not really interested in spreading democracy, they are actually not interested in the destiny of these people and know that they will always be the underdogs.

by Magkad

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Abbas Beydoun: This is extremely difficult question. First of all there is internal culture which is threatened and there is also a social system which is threatened in the countries where there is no democracy. In such countries not only politics plays a role and most of these countries belong to non-western cultures. Of course the regimes in these countries take the responsibility of that in order to defend their existence and to create a culture of fear from the west and from any other attacking culture. We should also draw attention to the historical side of this issue, because the west was not always fair with the other nations. The west colonized these nations and destroyed their culture and create dictator regimes, so the reputation of the west is not really good in these countries, because there is an internal feeling that the west did not really care for the future for these nations and the west preferred dictator regimes on democratic governments.

by Abbas Beydoun

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Alvaro Restrepo: I think that this is a very naive question. On the eleventh september 2001 many North Americans asked themselves in a painful and naive way: “ Why do they hate us so much?” Have we obligated them to accept our qualities and to bring our way of life and our American Dream into the societies? For many societies this way of life and this American Dream is a nightmare. And it changed into the nightmare of the world. Many times the occidental countries that want to show the world how it should develop don’t see that they invade other forms of thinking that are not compatible with the world of consume and capitalism. I think that there is a dictatorship on the market that is comparable to other forms of dictatorship. It is a dictatorship in capitalist and occidental countries that many times don’t give the possibility to understand that there are other forms of living and that there are people who don’ t want to live like this. There are nations and cultures that don’t want to live this way of life.

by Alvaro Restrepo

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Ana Lucy Bengochea: My personal freedom is having a participation and talking about what is really happening, saying the marginalization and the evacuation which suffer my communities [inaudible]. We have to have personal limits and we to [inaudible] what is to define aspects at collective level, that the collective part is very important in the ethnic groups, especially in native ethnic groups at the level of Honduras and at the level of Latin America.

by Ana Lucy Bengochea

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Andries Botha: Hi Chris. You know, thank you for the question. I think you mustn’t make the assumption that people that don’t have the kind of Western democracy as a [form] that you are referring to are worse off. In many cases I think a lot of them may well be, but not always the case. I think what people get upset about is the assumption that Western democracy is a mode of government which is actually desirable and preferable as a global form of government. It’s not always the case. You know it’s proven time and time again. I think what we need to be doing is searching for ways in which we can develop [modes] of government where people’s lives are improved. But Western democracy is not necessarily a system which is culturally appropriate in other parts of the world. Human freedom, yes, is. To be culturally integrated, to have a sense of place, to be able to find a way in which your way of life, your religions, your worship systems, can be protected against an aggressive, capital, or global, consumerist way of living is perhaps something which we need to pay a lot more attention to. You know we need to be paying a lot more attention to how many many different localities, cultural localities, of [difference] in the world, can co-exist within a [kind] of macro governmental system. I think that that - rather than saying Western democracy is a preferred way of being. On the other hand we do know that when communities are destabilized, when worship systems are destroyed, when traditional forms of government are destroyed, creates an opportunity for people to move in and dictatorship to be established, and dictators are usually funded by people who…

by Andries Botha

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Angaangaq Lyberth: My dear Chris, I am so proud of you that you posed the question and that your question was chosen by many questions, out of many questions. You know, living in fear is not very good. I lived in fear for a long time. But the way we have done it has caused millions if not billions of people to live in fear by not having the freedom in which we all so long within ourself to have. So do you understand when people become aggressive because they don’t have what they want? Or they don’t get what they need? Because everything depends on what you need to what you want. There’s a big difference, remember that, that what I need to what I want, big difference. Unless those two are fulfilled you don’t have the freedom. You will always be fighting within yourself, within the family, with your community, within your nation and look at the world. That we say that oppression happens. Oppression is as bad in the western society as it in dictatorships. Remember that. Oppression within the dictatorship is as bad the oppression of where we’re living in the west. So who is right and who is wrong? Chris, I hope you find the answer. It lies within you, not out there. You are the one who needs to answer the question and fight that the answer be fulfilled to the world in which you live. I’m so proud of you. Keep working hard to advance the humankind to a new level of reality within. Thank you.

by Angaangaq Lyberth

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Anuradha Koirala: I think who all are having democracy, not having democracy are basically not aggressive in the western world. But, there are people in the western world who say or gives assurance that there will be democracy and they make problem or hatred between two people or two groups in a countries where there is no democracy. And then they create a war -- civil war or a war with terrorism and that is why I think people are finding that there is unjust and that unjustice is being done to them. So that is why I feel they are aggressive with the western world, not because they are not having democracy, part because the western people are playing with the lives of the people and of the country that is not aggressive.

by Anuradha Koirala

Sep 9, 2006 1:30:00 PM cite

Anuradha Mittal: I have two things to say about your question; one is I would ask you, “Do you think the way this war was launched, for example, in Iraq in order to bring democracy and remove a dictator, was it done in a democratic way?” When I think about that question, I realize that so many people marched against this immoral invasion of Iraq; and yet the Bush administration went ahead with this idea of spreading democracy. So, given that, I would say that you cannot bring democracy through undemocratic means. Two, if we actually think that because these Western rich nations are bringing democracy in countries like Iraq and people are not living in fear, I think we need to look at the number of civilian deaths, the fear of people of bombs going off, to look at the civil war that’s going on today in Iraq, thanks to the kind of intervention U.S. did in the name of bringing democracy or look at the fear that people live with or have lived with recently in Lebanon. So, I think it is a total myth when in the name of promoting democracy, immoral, illegitimate wars have been launched just to promote the interest of few corporations. They do not take away the fear of people. They are not fulfilling aspirations of the people of Iraq or elsewhere. These are unjust wars that are -- do not have the approval of the people of the U.S. or of England or all those countries that have sent their troops in there. And actually, if I could also add, I would say that it’s not necessarily true that I as an immigrant, a brown skinned woman feel secure in U.S. I do live in fear in that country especially with all this war on terrorism, the kind of encroachments on our rights that have taken place. I live in fear in that country and I know a lot of people live in fear. So, I think we have to really question these myths that are given to us about bringing democracy to the rest of the world or giving people an opportunity to live without fear. Actually we are living in fear around the world.

by Anuradha Mittal