U.S. government not perfect model for all

As tanks rolled into the streets of Bangkok last week,
anti-Thaksin protestors cheered the ends they had achieved.

Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra, rocked by accusations of
corruption and calls to step down in recent months, had been ousted
from power while abroad speaking to the United Nations.

But as the tanks rolled through the capital, signaling the end
of an allegedly corrupt leader who misused his power, they crushed
beneath them the very principles of democracy.

The events of Sept. 19 should come as no surprise considering
that, according to the BBC, Thailand has experienced almost 20
attempted coups since the end of the absolute monarchy in 1932.

The Thai government is suffering from the same unfortunate
problem we are now seeing in the government being constructed in
Iraq: It is an inorganic democracy without cultural relevance.

Democracy succeeds in the U.S., flawed as it may be, because of
the cultural factors that support its existence. Ours is an organic
democracy that suits our culture, our history and our ideals.

It is foolish to think a system that barely functions under our
cultural norms can be applied to any other country with success.
The entire idea of democracy-building is doomed to fail because
democracy itself is not a universal idea.

If precedent prevails, building an artificial democracy in Iraq
will prove a Sisyphean task that will only result in continued
failures and more bloodshed.

Looking across the planet, it is clear that many past
democracy-building success stories are showing signs of
weakness.

For example, South Africa, now over a decade past apartheid, has
become burdened with a de facto one-party government in which,
according to the BBC, the African National Congress is guaranteed
an absolute majority as long as the days of apartheid are still
held in the public mind.

Even after allegations of corruption and a very public rape
trial, it appears that Jacob Zuma may still be appointed leader of
the ANC and thus the leader of South Africa ““ without any
public referendum.

While protests against Zuma are focused on his controversial
statements about AIDS (he had claimed that after having unprotected
sex with an HIV-positive woman, he showered to reduce his risk of
infection) and his past corruption offenses, few question the
fundamental problem with de facto one-party rule.

Very little, if any, public outrage has been focused on the
deeply un-democratic format of the South African political
landscape.

The situation in Thailand, still seen as perhaps the most
democratic nation in Southeast Asia, is more disillusioning for
even the most ardent supporters of democracy-building. The 15 years
that led up to September’s coup was the longest period of
uninterrupted democracy in Thai history.

Before that, a vicious cycle prevailed: first a coup, then
military rule, followed by the establishment of a new constitution,
and finally the emergence of a badly coordinated civilian
government ““ only to have it all start over again.

A decade-and-a-half later, Thailand is witnessing yet another
military intervention making a mockery of the democratic process,
restricting free speech and assembly, and calling for yet another
constitution.

While it is true that Prime Minister Thaksin had been involved
in some underhanded dealings and incompetently managed the Muslim
insurgency in the south, the democratic process to prosecute and
remove him from office was lost in pursuit of the end.

The damage to Thailand’s democratic institutions will far
outlast the benefits of getting Thaksin out sooner.

While Thailand, South Africa and Iraq may seem like far cries
from one another, they share one critical trait: None has evolved
into democracy organically.

Iraq can have no hope to sustain a democracy when its own
culture does not support it. While it makes for great public
relations to say we are bringing liberty and justice to all Iraqis,
it is dishonest to say that the institutions we have built in the
U.S. can be easily laid down anywhere in the world with the same
success.

If we are going to build better democracies anywhere, I say we
start at home.

To embrace the democratic process, e-mail Levine at
jlevine@media.ucla.edu. Send general comments to
viewpoint@media.ucla.edu.

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *