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.
