Is democracy really what westerners hype it up to be?
Particularly liberal democracy.
It seems like the success of western nations predated their adoption of democratic systems.
And if you look at the most successful countries in Asia (which was "backwards" till the white man's came around) are probably one of the least democratic, China, Hong Kong, Singapore (which might as well be a single-party state).
As for Korea and Japan. Japan might as well be a western nation, and it was hardly democratic during its development into a Great Power. Korea, I don't really know much about Korea, but it seems like the exception. I've heard some people argue that Park Chung-hee's (Korea's authoritarian dictator) policies lead to Korea's modern success, I don't know much about the credibility of that.
It looks like it doesn't work in other continents as well, and we all know how much of a shitshow most of Africa and the Middle-east is.
So has the west feeding the rest of the world bullshit /his/?
>>980017
Democracy is generally a post requisite of greatness
Pretty much.
Having an ideology to expose helps to expand influence.
See USSR, Nazi Germany, and Freedom&Democracy.
Ideology should be seen more as a tool than as absolute dogma
The success of the Western model of government involves more than holding an election once and then everything working itself out.
What you need is a government that is conducive to economic growth.
The most dynamic Western governments (the Netherlands, the UK, the US) achieved this by creating parliaments which would then be dominated by businessmen, and would thus protect the interests of the business class from the monarchy, the nobility, or the rabble.
Until recently, it was assumed that the best development model was democracy, followed by the growth of corporations and gradual economic change.
What Westerners failed to realize is that a democratic system of government is only as strong as the actual practical adherence of society to the rule of law. In many places, corruption is so common, and the rule of law so weak, that merely holding elections doesn't change the actual power structure, or the actual system of law, enough to protect free enterprise, reduce government corruption, or encourage development.
The Asian Tigers went with the model of having the government dominated by large corporations which would create exports to sell in the developed world. This proved to work very well for development, as the corporations still had to be efficient in order to compete in global markets, and the government had an incentive to keep the economy competitive, so as to make more moni.
However, the more Confucian model of development followed by East Asia comes with serious drawbacks. Working conditions in East Asia are shit. The Asian Tigers tend to have lower life satisfaction, higher suicide rates, and lower birth rates, because every aspect of society is structured to serve the needs of multi-national corporations, even more than in the West. Finally, corruption persists in most of East Asia in a way that simply wouldn't be acceptable in Europe or the Anglosphere.
TL;DR Countries develop when the government has an incentive to see the country develop.
>>980017
you left out taiwan for some reason
>>980017
>So has the west feeding the rest of the world bullshit /his/?
Yes.
>>980017
Democracy is only possible when a plurality of the population is economically independent and capable of exerting power. It is then more efficient to engage in democratic processes than the alternative, which are riots and rebellions.
In all other forms of governance, social issues are dealt with harshly, until unrest boils over into violence. Large state subsidies may help quell such unrest, as well as religion. Saudi Arabia for example, has both.
>>980017
Democracy is reliant on a stable, educated, and politically active and responsible citizenry. As the population increases all of those things take a dip for various reason. I'm pretty sure it was Solon who said that the idea population for a voting democracy was 5000 participants.
Democracy works (relatively) in the west because the west has a cultural history of democracies and republics and none monarchical rule that the rest of the world doesn't share. This also explains why governmental overthrow and coup de tats are siginifigantly less common in the west.
>implying the US is a democracy
http://www.bbc.com/news/blogs-echochambers-27074746
>>980055
Yes, I forgot about Taiwain.
Chiang Kai-shek is the only answer.
>>980052
That sounds legit, but I'm not that knowledgeable enough to say that it is.
If you look at other countries in Asia especially SE Asia those countries are doing the same thing, but it seems like they're not really progressing.
Plus you can do all that shit effectively even in a non-democratic system.
Is there a correlation with the Sinosphere and the success of Asian countries, it seems like these successful Asian countries were influenced by Chinese culture in the past, might be the Confucianism.
Democracy is only possible when the hoi polloi btfo the oligarchy and massacre them all as in Corcyra.
>>980017
>So has the west feeding the rest of the world bullshit /his/?
Yes
I'd like someone to present proof of multiple countries that have been improved because of democracy.
>>980017
>which was "backwards" till the white man's came around
This is the white equivalent of WE WUZ KINGZ
>>980017
No, not at all. It's only a form of government for people who are already civil. It cannot be imposed on evil people. They quickly game it and the entire country becomes evil.
>>980110
I think it's a matter of civilization.
Like, Japan, China, and Korea have been inhabited forever.
I'm guessing that there's a couple centuries of ground work that are simply missing.
On the other hand, in the 50s, China was actively moving backwards, South Korea was Africa tier poor, and Japan was still moving out of the rubble.
Maybe Southeast Asia just needs a couple generations of peace.
>>980302
How in the name of fuck is he wrong
Literally leave this thread if you think east Asian countries "WUZ ADVANCED N SHIIEETT" around the time Europeans had serious contact with them.
I think Heinlein's idea of democracy in Starship Troopers is the only worthwhile form of democracy. Educate your populace in civics and if they really want to vote then give them the opportunity to earn their citizenship by service to the state (doesn't even have to be military service).
Simply turning the age of 18 and being able to have a say in how your nation is run is pants-on-head retarded.
>>980455
>gridlocked in a two-party puppet show who are perpetually fucking over their own people
>somehow thinks others are jealous
lmao
>>980455
That container should read "POC semen"
>>980474
>>980467
>>980439
+1
Elitism was certainly the original intent of many, if not all, Founding Fathers.
>>980483
I wouldn't even call it elitism. Anyone has the option to pursue citizenship. Even if it means sharpening pencils for government offices something will be found for you. You just gotta earn it.
>>980467
to be fair, Europe is just America II at this point.
>>980479
>call America addicted to nubian semen
>proceeds to show an illustration of America having gay sex with Europe
You sure showed me, Anon.
>>980495
Would you consider the civics education mandatory? Or would you like any other form of mandatory education in regards to politics?
>>980069
it doesn't matter what Democracies were established for.
Most nations also have a representative Democracy, which fits this idea anyway.
God, everyone who comes to this board is retarded.
>>980558
Nah I think civics would be the ideal subject to educate about duties and responsibilities of both citizen and state. Politics alone wouldn't really cut it.
And as I said I don't really believe anything should be mandatory, but if you want your citizenship you better know what it means.
>>980463
GOD BLESS AMERICA
"Democracy" is better because it gives a legal up-front way to redress grievances and also for everyone to have a stake in the continued survival of the state. In other systems their is no way to redress grievances so the people turn to either corruption or rebellion. Other systems also have a much smaller share of the population who "owns" the state and thus have a harder time securing compliance by means other than inefficient means of oppression.
>>980553
Europe isn't a man. Europa was a woman.
