Qaddafi's Demise
May Mark New Global Democratic Era
Could the brutal toppling of Muammar
Qaddafi usher in a new surge of democracy in the Middle East and around the
world? According to this editorial from China's state-run Huanqui, thesenew democracies may or may not involve 'one man - one vote' elections, and are
likely to be quite a departure from what we in the West consider 'democratic.'
The corpse of Colonel Moammar Qaddafi, beaten up, shot at and looking much the worse for wear, is now splayed out on the floor of a refrigerated meat locker, the object of scorn and ridicule by the very people he claimed loved him, Oct. 21.
News today of former Libyan
leader Muammar Qaddafi's killing sent ripple effects around the world. His
death is being generally perceived as a sign that strongman rule in the Middle
East is over. From Saddam to Mubarak and now Qaddafi, all were soldiers who
became decades-long national rulers. Their tragic fates will now precipitate a
shift in the paradigm of power and reconstruction in the wider region.
Democracy will be more widely
considered a "world trend," but because of the deficiencies of democratization,
twists, turns and chaos on the road to restructuring will be difficult for the
Middle East to avoid. And at the same time, the worship of democracy is now in retreat
around the world, the enthusiasm having been gradually replaced by acute and
complicated reflection.
The puzzling, suspicion and discontent
over political systems that has spread across the world has been compounded by recession,
along with the political-difficulty of adapting to globalization. Whether in developed
Western nations or emerging countries, the public wants the most
"superior" system possible, even if that necessitates temporary inefficiencies
and weaknesses.
In fact, there is a semblance
of similarity between the "Occupy Wall Street" campaign and the "Arab
Spring uprisings," which is something that would have been unimaginable
even a few months ago.
Qaddafi and Mubarak may have
left the political arena in different ways, but their fate as individuals is
very similar. Egypt didn't experience civil war, but the political chaos that
ensued after the revolution has yet to subside. The situation in the Middle
East reflects a general confusion. Will the "pursuit of democracy"
lead to an ultra-nationalist or fundamentalist fork in the road? There are
certainly many doubts about its future.
The recession in the West has
been further highlighted by street protests, which will make its claim as the leading
global political model more difficult. Questioning the myths of the Western
system has already emerged in Africa and some Asian countries. Now with the West's
internal controversies, more doubts will arise.
From the end of the Cold War until
yesterday when Qaddafi was killed, democracy has been considered a "good
thing" and an "unstoppable trend." But questions remain about what
the true meaning of democracy is and whether "one man - one vote" elections
will bring the same results in different countries. It will take years more
human experience before a realization emerges.
For a long time it was
thought that "one man one vote" was the only vital characteristic of
a democratic system. But in many countries the social consequences of such
elections were, if not tyrannical, certainly they weren't democratic. This format
brought results similar to those found under authoritarian rule.
Posted
by WORLDMEETS.US
The purpose of democracy is not
to be an object of worship, but to produce real effects. It must promote
tolerance and facilitate social progress.
There is no reason, despite
its past achievements, for democracy to stop evolving and developing only to
become rigid, fundamentalist and absolute. It must be adapted to the reality of
different countries and create new channels through which the public and those
in power can communicate.
In the Internet era, no government can pretend to be doing the will of the
people in complete isolation. The greater its interaction with the public is, the
more successful and more democratically evolved a government will be. Elections
themselves are not the only thing democracy has to offer. Governments should be
assessed by the services they provide to its people so they can receive the
public's approval.
"Strongman rule" is
not only coming to an end in the Middle East, but throughout the world. Nations
will pursue their own forms of democracy and seek to avoid its defects and maximize
its benefits within their own institutional structures.
All of this may usher in a
new chapter of governance for global society.
