The Case for Spreading Democracy Abroad?

You're kidding me right? Should democracy be spread abroad by the US and its Allies? I argue in this excerpt, no! Consider the following reasons.

It is mindful to note the definition of democracy I am working with. It is, liberal democracy signifying freedom from arbitrary rule, speech, association, etc., and ability to own. It is not electoral democracy, because even the most tainted states are democratic, in the sense of majority rule. Consider, Iran, Venezuela, and some other states tainted as evil, they are all democratic. In fact, in the case of Venezuela, in a certain perspective it is more democratic than the US because the people exercise the right via referendum to impeach the president. Such a measure is not done by representatives, who may not always act according to the wishes of the people. So liberal democracy is what the US and its allies are spreading. At this juncture I consider their agenda.

I ask myself, why is freedom from considered imperative to secure when freedom to food, clean water, etc is still lacking. Why is the US ensuring liberal freedoms abroad when there are equally important freedom to livelihood that is severely lacking in our societies? It is indeed something to consider. But why do I disagree with the agenda to spread liberal democracy abroad?

The first reason is that I think that liberal democracy should come from within the people rather than from abroad. If liberal democracy is imposed on the people by the US and its allies, it will not last. Examples of failed democratic attempts pundits frequently point to include: Afghanistan and Pakistan.

Secondly, liberal democracies reflect the culture of liberal societies. It would be insulting to promote liberal democracies in a societies that is illiberal. Illiberal societies are very proud of their culture and do not wish to be entertained by the ideals of liberalism.

Thirdly, the agenda of the US and its allies is not to be trusted. How can one receive a gift from an individual, when you know that the gift is potentially a trap? It is not politically prudent. As mentioned, there is an agenda by the West to promote freedom from and go to war in the name of it but would not promote freedom of, which is equally important.

Fourthly, linking liberalism to economic growth is nonsense! China, Japan, US and Britain, when they initially starting developing, non of them used economic liberalism as a guiding principle. They all used mercantilist measures.

Lastly, it is important to consider the points of the democratic peace theory. It argues that democracies rarely go to war because of norms and institutional constraints. However, it can only adequately account for after WWII 1945. It is also important to note that it is not the make up of these states that prevent wars but it can be best understood by the US emphasis on peace amongst Western European states and North America.

No God? I will Argue for

There is no convincing evidence that God exists however; when we suffer and no one is there for us, some of us call for Him even if we chose to ignore him in time past. Why is this? Why is it that when we hit rock bottom and all our friends desert us and there is no one to rely on we call for a heavenly being for help?

And surprisingly, this heavenly being gives strength and peace to cope with our crisis. All I want to argue is, why put people before God when people are not there all the time. God will be there, every time, in need and in abundance. He deserves first place. 

You may ask how is God there, how do you know? My sister or brother, sincerely pray and you will feel love. If you want to know if God exists, ask Him to show His love and mercy to you and reveal Himself to you. It's definitely worth trying! He will always be there. He is a friend that sticks closer than a brother.

Prayer: Now unto Him who is able to do exceedingly abundantly above all that we ask or think, according to the power that works in us, to Him be glory in the church by Christ Jesus to all generations, forever and ever. Amen.

Post-Incarceration Conditions In the U.S: Necessary?

When ex-felons leave our inhumane prisons, they are have to face the rude awakening of several limitations to their re-integration into society. 

Disenfranchisement

First of all, if we want ex-felons to be re-integrated into society why do we prevent them from voting? What does voting have to do with anything? Statistics show that the the disenfranchisement of ex-felons has led to the dis-enfranchisement of entire communities. A staggering 15% of African American males cannot vote in the U.S. Their ability to vote could have definitely changed the outcome of several elections.  The outcome of the 2000 presidential election  might have been a different been considering the fact that African American tend to vote democratic. Also, statistics show that 5.4 million people in the U.S. have been stripped of their right to vote. Is it necessary to strip people of their right to vote in a democratic state? What is the rationale behind it? 

Subsidized Housing and Welfare

In certain states in the US, after being incarcerated you face the possibility of being stripped of welfare and loss eligibility to attain subsidized housing. Note, that these people have been away from society for at times, years! Shouldn't they be the ones that need welfare and subsidized housing the most? Some scholars suggest that the present policy on welfare in the US stems form the bankruptcy of many states. However, shouldn't we find other alternatives of funding instead of making life difficult for people who need assistance in reintegration the most?

Inability to Acquire Professional Licenses

Licenses regulated by the state such as barbers, real estate agents, plumbing, electrical work can effectively limit the ability of ex-felons to work in these fields. Also, mindful that ex-felons  cannot pass bondable checks imposed by private enterprises and are also limited in working for private individuals. These bondable checks can also limit individuals from applying to universities.

The question to ask at this juncture is, do these measures need to be in place after ex-felons have completed their term in jail? These punitive punishments should not be transfered into the every day lives of these individuals when they are trying to reintegrate into society and become better citizens. They should end within our prisons.

The effects of these post incarceration conditions is that it has affected entire communities such as the African American community and other minorities. These conditions have also affected people of lower economic status tremendously, making life even harder for them. Lastly but not exhaustive, the loss of welfare such as child support upon incarceration affects women disproportionally because statistics show they make use of this assistance the most.