March 08, 2005

Why "Realists' should not be entrusted with power...

James P. Pinkerton writes, in Newsday:

'People Power" is erupting around the world, but what about here in China?

What sort of political arrangements would these 1.3 billion Chinese make for themselves if they could write a real constitution? And should Americans be confident that a democratic China would be friendlier to the United States?...

Neither President Bush nor his supporters EVER say that all the newly democratic nations are going to be friendly to the US. This is a straw-man argument. The point is that once countries become solidly democratic, we don't have to worry about them dissolving into chaos or poverty, or sponsoring terrorists or invading their neighbors.

...Here in China, absent honest elections, there's no way to know the truth for sure, but it seems apparent that the party's single biggest foreign-policy plank - the reincorporation of Taiwan back into "The Motherland" - is a political winner among ordinary Chinese.

Which is to say, the United States, which supports Taiwan's continued independence, has probably found itself on the wrong side of China's emerging political majority...

Ridiculous. It's a "winning issue" because the Chinese don't get to argue the issues they are really interested in.

Does Pinkerton imagine that the people making the stuff that Walmart sells want a war with the US and Taiwan? Or even bad relations? It's easy for the Chinese government to whip up anger about Taiwan right now, because people can't express their anger about corrupt officials and poverty and high taxes and lack of opportunity and religious oppression.

Every time there's a nation that may possibly democratize, we hear predictions that they are going to be just like they were before. I bet there were predictions in the 1940's that Germany and Japan would elect a new bunch of brown-shirts and start new aggressive wars....

(Thanks to Orrin, who points out that China probably won't stay one nation once the grip of the Communists is loosened.)

Posted by John Weidner at March 8, 2005 08:44 AM
Comments

So, let me get this straight:

If a democratic country is more likely to install an anti-American government, then we should not support democracy there.

Have I got that right?

So, what James Pinkerton and company are saying, then, is that it made sense to topple the likes of Salvador Allende and oppose the rise of Fidel Castro? That Jimmy Carter's abandonment of pro-American dictators like Somoza and the Shah was wrong?

That, in fact, Ronald Reagan was mistaken, for example, by calling for Marcos to step down, since Marcos was willing to allow us to remain in bases there?

Conversely, does this mean that the likes of Pinkerton and company would support the toppling of leaders like Mossadeq, since their pro-US credentials were unclear (at best)?

Somehow, in the rush to find the clouds behind the silver linings of Iraq and Lebanon, the Left further descends into both incoherence and self-contradiction.

Not that, in the Post-Modern world that matters....

Posted by: Lurking Observer at March 8, 2005 12:10 PM
Weblog by John Weidner