"Too often in the past, going all the way back to the days of Woodrow Wilson, we have operated on the assumption that a bad government becomes better after the magic of “change.” President Wilson said that we were fighting the First World War to make the way “safe for democracy.” But what actually followed was the replacement of autocratic monarchies by totalitarian dictatorships that made previous despots pale in comparison."
- Thomas Sowell, 'Measuring Force'
This makes me think about the lecture to my students about the American fight for independence vs. the French Revolution. Sometimes the present system sucks; but more often than not, the destruction of one unpopular system has simply resulted in a far more oppressive system taking its place (see Napoleonic France, Nazi Germany, Bolshevik Russia, Iran under the Ayatollah). It's also what's been worrying me about Egypt initially, and now Libya (among others). Picking sides before having the whole story, pointing fingers about abuse and oppression without understanding what the other options are, does not seem like a good way to handle international military and diplomatic affairs. Of course it is good to rid the world of oppressive dictators, but what then? Having a plan for what comes after is often more important than doing something in the first place.
No comments:
Post a Comment