We have been blessed to grow up in a democracy that, at least on paper, ensures equal rights for all. We believe in this form of government so much that we want to share it with the world and believe it will benefit men and women everywhere. However, Chua claims that implementing a democracy will not immediately solve a country's problems.
Read one of the following articles or choose another article from the NY Times--Discuss it and incorporate ideas or claims from Chua.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/middleeast/31egypt.html
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iraq/elections/index.html
Read one of the following articles or choose another article from the NY Times--Discuss it and incorporate ideas or claims from Chua.
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/03/31/world/middleeast/31egypt.html
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/news/international/countriesandterritories/iraq/elections/index.html
20 comments:
In the New York Times article, Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say, Amr Emam discusses the elections that were going on in Egypt. They are trying to incorporate a constitution and set of presidential elections into their government. The hope is that a presidency will bring about stability and development. There was a prior constitution that was lacking restrictions on the presidents’ term lengths. This constitution declares that Islam will be the state religion. Amy Chua, in her article, claims “the relationship between free-market democracy and ethnic violence around the world is inextricably bound up with globalization” (67). She builds up to this claim throughout her article by showing the relationship through examples. She states that many people believe that more markets and democracy throughout the world will lead to a cure for hatred and ethnic violence. The problem with the elections and new constitution in Egypt is the incorporation of democracy into the government. The component of the people voting for a president is the main focus of democracy. Additionally, Egypt will have two chambers of parliament, which will be responsible for drafting the constitution, and then it will be approved after. By stating that Egypt will make Islam the dominant religion, Emam is showing that a specific ethnic group will have power over the other religious groups. Chua believes that “global markets are bitterly perceived as reinforcing American wealth and dominance” (67). By incorporating a democracy into Egypt, they are following a similar pattern as America. However, Chua states “global populist and democratic movements give strength, legitimacy, and voice to the impoverished, frustrated, excluded masses of the world” (67). These people that have not had their voices heard in the past will now have a say in government. This is typically seen as a positive thing to most people. Yet, after reading Chua’s article it is hard to say that democracy is the best solution to the problems in other countries of the world. Violence as a result of democracy is not a good thing to hear. Democracy should lead to better conditions for most people. The problem with this is that some groups have the advantage in the election and overpower some people’s voice as stated by Emam.
In their article "Islamists head for win in Tunisia's Arab Spring Vote" Tarek Amara and Christian Lowe discuss the elections in Tunisia. In October 2011, the Islamist Party lead by Ennahda defeated the Arab party. According to the authors, the main goal of Ennahda’s party is to establish democracy in Tunisia, as well as liberal values in the region. Campaign manager Abdelhamid Jlazzi said that “there will be no rupture… [that they] came to power via democracy, [not] through tanks.” Ennahda’s Islamist party is the only Islamist party to win elections since Hamas won a 2006 election in the Palestinian Territories. According to Ennahda and members of his party establishing democracy guarantees citizens in Tunisia a free-represion and free-dictatorship environment. These neoliberalist ideals have also been the root of many problems during the elections. “About 400 people protested outside the election commission building, alleging that Ennahda, led by the long exiled Rachid Ghannouchi, was guilty of vote fraud.” Besides the harsh accusations and ruthless protests election officials reported that “only minor violations,” nothing that could really affect the final outcome of the elections. Despite the unpopularity of democracy within the Muslim or Islamist community, Islamist are now willing to try new routes to ethnic and class equality. According to Amara and Lowe the election “gave 40 percent of the seats in the assembly” to Ennahda’s Islamist and democratic party, which “draft a new constitution” by the new elections in 2013. The establishment of a new democratic party should in some way lessen the oppression and suffering of the poor majority by giving them more freedom to make decisions and have their voices be heard in the assembly.
According to Chua, “markets concentrate enormous wealth in the hands of an ‘outsider’ minority, thereby fomenting ethnic envy and hatred among often chronically poor majorities” (69). In places like Tunisia where the majority of private property is owned solely by a insignificantly small Arab community, hatred and revolts can arise. However, by establishing a democratic government, the need for a revolution in order to overthrow a totalitarian wealthy minority will no longer be considered by the people as the most efficient way to solve the issue. In fact, giving them more freedom to decide what they want to do with their lives can be beneficial for both sides.
In the article Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say, Amir Emam talks about the upcoming elections in Egypt. In the article Emam discusses how the people fear that an early vote would “give an overwhelming advantage to well-organized groups like the Muslim Brotherhood and the now deposed National Democratic Party, which once ruled virtually unopposed”. This is exactly what Chua is talking about in here article. She believes that in the process of implementing democracy there is often a market-dominant minority. I am sure these examples of groups are not the majority of the people so this would lead to a faulty democratic system. I can’t guarantee that these groups will be the market dominant minority, however I can assume with their political power they will be. Chua continues with the fact that this issue will lead to the majority into falling for a vote seeking politician who is opposed to the wealthy minority. This is a vicious cycle that would take a lot of refiguring in order to reverse the hierarchy.
I was impressed when reading this, “Employees had been demanding the ouster of the editors because they had been appointed by Mr. Mubarak. The fired editors included Osama Saraya, the head of Al-Ahram, a daily newspaper that was the government’s semiofficial voice”. This is a strategic method that they used to fight the injustice of the previous minority. It is so foreign to me because in the US we have freedom of speech to an extent but we don’t have government controlled newspapers. Even on the day of massive demonstration there was no coverage by these newspapers explaining the situation going on in the center of the city. This is the government trying to cover up for themselves, they are avoiding the corruption. This relates to Chua’s statement, “The second is an attack against democracy by forces favorable to the market-dominant minority”. This is a perfect example of how the market dominant minority could easily sabotage the majority.
Transitions in a large group almost always prove difficult. Precarious changes in power lead to destructive situations in which interim governments fight to establish order. In the article discussing Egypt, “Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say” from the New York Times, the transition period in Egypt from Honsi Mubarak’s reign to establishing a new leader procures many questions. Mubarak’s resignation marked a liberal victory; one that removed a leader that suppressed his people, but these people must develop a new way of life. The new constitution remains similar to the one under Mubarak, but important democratically based additions have been implemented, including a limitation of eight years on the president’s term. This constitution will remain temporary until the parliament elects a 100-member assembly to draft a new constitution. Unfortunately, it seems that because of the hastiness of the elections, well established groups have immense advantages in the election over new liberal groups. Mubarak may be deposed, but his party has the opportunity coming up shortly to regain incumbency in the presidency due to the youth of the liberal groups that overthrew Mubarak from power. Chua may argue that this immediately offers an undeniably detrimental cycle; one that still persecutes the minorities and establishes undemocratic ideals such as a standardized state religion. Important “house-keeping” moves certainly have been made to eradicate Mubarak’s political propaganda – his newspaper for example – but many questions still remain as to whether Egypt can actually utilize a democratic style of governance. Religious zealots have fought incessantly for superlative power and eradication of opposition for years – to no avail. Chua understands that ousting one leader and attempting to rapidly move this country immediately into a fully democratic state may just lead the country to ignorantly elect a leader worse than Mubarak. Chua argues that democracy grows, rather than sprouting overnight – like the U.S. erroneously believes it can. For people to understand why democracy works, it must develop in front of them in their own situations and daily lives.
In Emam's article in the New York Times, he talks about the new regime being formed in Egypt following former leader Mubarak stepping down. The process of transferring power from old to new involves a new constitution being drafted with the Egyptian military temporarily holding power until Egypt holds elections eventually. As part of the transfer of power, many editors of publications were removed from their jobs because of loyalty to the previous regime after Mubarak had appointed them. The elections were to be delayed beyond the date of publication of the article as people who supported Mubarak's overthrow didn't want already-established and strong groups immediately able to gain power over much weaker groups. In relating the article to Chua's, the process mentioned in Emam's is one where officials in the country are in control of forming the new government, choosing when to do certain things and what to do, while Chua mentions many similar reluctant changes to democracy that were initiated by the US. Chua sees the US's push for democracy in certain areas as a threatening and questionable prospect for the countries involved as the countries may not be sure what the US intends to do once democracy is instituted. Therefore, the people in these countries can be very reluctant to accept US-motivated changes of regime. On the other hand is the case in Egypt where the Egyptian officials are in control of the power transfer and things seem to be going well. From this we can see that countries need to, perhaps,be motivated on their own to institute democracy and have complete control of the process as they know what they want and that there is no conflict in interest from outside parties like the US. If the change is instituted by the US or another world power with possible interests that conflict with those of the actual country, the change may not go as smoothly and the people would not likely support it as fervently.
In a New York Times article by Amr Emam, military rulers in Egypt announced that elections for a new president will take place on November. A member of the Supreme Council of the Armed Forces, Major General Mamdouh Shaheen, stated that a new president would bring "stability and development". In addition, the 18-member council will also hand over legislative powers in September, following the election for a new parliament. While progress for a peaceful resolution to the protests against the former president Hosni Mubarak seems to be likely, claims from Amy Chua imply that this kind of movement would result in further violence in the short run, creating an additional problem in an already tense situation. In Chua's article, "A World On the Edge", she argues that free market economies and with a democratic form of government result in heightened conflicts between the indigenous people and the minorities who take advantage of the free market economies. As mentioned by Chua, markets create conflicts since they "concentrate enormous wealth in the hands of an 'outsider' minority, thereby fomenting ethic envy and hatred among often chronically poor majorities" (69). This uneven distribution of wealth usually results when immensely rich companies place holds in recently opened markets, which gives a large sum of wealth to a select few. In addition, Chula argues that a democratic government empowers the poor majorities, who are angered by how the minority took advantage of the free market, which escalates the tensions between the minority and majority drastically. Instead of creating an open-minded community, there will be an "emergence of demagogues who scapegoat the resented minority and foment active ethnonationalist movements demanding that the country's wealth and identity be reclaimed by the 'true owners of the nation'" (69). The results from these rallies will ultimately escalate into further violence, instead of generating peace, as globalization activist intend to do.
After a revolution takes place in a country transitioning from one way of government to another can be a very challenging task to accomplish. In an article written by Amr Eman titled, “Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say” published in the New York Times on March 30, 2011 it discusses the new constitution that will be formed after elections take place in Egypt. According to Eman, after former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak stepped down on February 11, 2011 the constitution went along with him. The people of Egypt wanted and still want change for their beloved country, but the article brings up a couple of factors that are troubling the process. The article discusses that it could be dangerous for the country to jump into a new constitution so soon because drastic fast change is not always good. Amy Chua also discusses this factor in her article. She tells her readers that when a new democracy is introduced into a country rapidly there could be multiple negative results causing the country to be worse off than it was before. Some revolutionaries in Egypt are scared that if voting takes place too soon and a new constitution is instated too quickly after the fall of Mubarak the country could be worse off. Also the article states that some citizens fear that if elections are held too soon well established and organized organizations such as the Muslim Brotherhood could have a great advantage over other groups who have not had ample time to properly form. Chua also discusses unequal advantages in her article and explains when a group of individuals has unfair advantages, specifically dominant market power, over another group there will not be true peace among the people. If a group is elected and many of the Egyptians believe the election was not fair for every group participating that could cause there to be more protests within the country. The new group could also take over the market causing more people to be unsatisfied. By reading this article as well and Chua’s it is clear that democracy can be greatly beneficial for a country, but if the democracy is implemented too quickly and unfairly the country could be worse off than it was before the new democracy was instated.
In the article Elections in Egypt by the fall, the author talks about the public fear of an early vote. Young liberal feared that an early vote would give an over whelming advantage to “well-organized groups” that would thus have a majority vote, this ties in to Chua’s claim about market dominating minorities. This majority could simply vote in favor of many propositions and for people to hold chairs who would end up hurting the minority. Since the constitution received a make over many democratic views have been added in, the new constitution however has some of the old constitution incorporated into it thus merging the new and all government together. Chua believes that when a free market democracy is pursued where there is a market-dominate minority that all that will happen is backlash. I interpret this to mean that if they do and early vote in Egypt the young liberals may backlash against the majority of the well-organized groups.
By voting out one leader who was not looking out for the well being of his country and people there is always the possibility of someone worse being elected. Here in America we vote off of what we are told and we hope that those people will remain true to what they have said and their promises. Chua acknowledges that with the replacement of one leader a worse one might come in and that could cause more trouble for the country, although they are the ones that chose that leader.
This article sounds like it would be an amazing thing for Egypt to have a democracy where their people have a say, but Chua tears down democracy and claims that it could also be disastrous for democracies to come into new countries. She says that democracies only represent the wealth of Americans and their ideas.
I really liked the section of the article that talks about not being allowed to form groups based off of religion. This prevents against hate and competition between different religions. However at the same time it also declares Islam the state religion, this I do not like. A constitution in my opinion is in place to protect the people not to declare a religion.
After reading the article, “Islamists head for in Tunisia’s Arab Spring vote” written by journalist Tarek Amara and Christian Lowe, their illustration of democracy proved that democracy is sometimes never the best choice to help relieve people from dictatorship. The article talks about how there was a vote fraud during an election in Tunisia. Amara and Low states, “In the only hint of trouble so far in the election, about 400 people protested outside the election commission building, alleging that Ennahda, led by the long exiled Rachid Ghannouchim, was guilty of vote fraud.” This is one illustration that democracy ceases to perform equally for people to elect their leaders. Professor of Law at Yale Law School, Amy Chua in her article, “A World on the Edge” addresses the topic of globalization and argues that free market and democracy is not a solution to poverty and it causes ethnic hatred. Chua claims, “markets and democracy benefit different ethnic groups in such societies, the pursuit of free-market democracy produces highly unstable and combustible conditions” (69). In some societies, some voting parties have advantages over others when it comes to elections. I agree with Chua that democracy and free markets may not serve as the best solution to globalization because people can cheat in elections and override decisions. This is also means that dictatorship can be brought back to power in control. Amara and Lowe quotes Meriam Othmani, a 28 year old journalist who talks about vote fraud. Othmani said, “Also, you’ll see the return of dictatorship once Ennahda achieves a majority in the constituent assembly.” This shows that when the majority wins in an election, the majority can abuse their power and oppress the minority. This is also illustrates ethnic hatred because some individuals may not be happy with a decision made. When the 400 people were protesting about the vote fraud about Ghannouchim, this shows hatred within the group protesting because they are not happy with the choice made. Therefore, free market and democracy is not the best choice for a country to develop because it can cause more problems than solutions.
The New York Times article about democracy in Egypt directly relates to many of the things Chua mentioned. In the article is listed several problems people feared about implementing democracy and elections. One was that certain groups like the Muslim Brotherhood or the National Democratic Party still wielded much of the power in the country and having an early election would give an advantage to these well established organizations. Democracy is equated with freedom so it would seem logical to implement democracies. It would take alot of adjustment to the new freedoms and if it is not properly set to the standards of a democracy then it would leave much room for corruption. In the article it said that Islam would be Egypt's state religion but parties founded on religious grounds will not be acceptable. That still creates a dominant ethnic group in the country. One that would create problems in the future if not dealt with before the drafting of their constitution. If a majority group wins an election they will have power and therefore can abuse it and oppress the minority groups. Even in our democracy these exploitations are openly capitalized on. This is what begins ethnic hatred and in some countries where true atrocities occur their retaliations will be much harsher. Chua's aunt was murdered because she was rich and Chinese. The person who killed her probably felt oppressed and looked down on by her so he did what he felt was necessary in an effort to express his suffering and contempt. The implementation of democracy is a good thing, but it has to be carefully watched and issues resolved before put into action or it will cause problems far worse down the road.
In the New York article, “Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say,” author Amr Emam talks about an upcoming election in Egypt. He says that Egypt is preparing to adopt a democracy through an election. He talks about how the people are voting for what they want and who they want in office. In other words, they are implementing a democracy in Egypt. They are trying to bring stability and development into Egypt by bringing in a democracy government. In Amy Chua’s article, “A World on the Edge,” she claims that a lot of violence comes from free market democracy. There is often a minority that controls most of the market economy. In Amy Chua’s article, she talked about the Chinese controlling most of the Philippians economy. And in this New York Times article, the author talks about the election. He says that the election will be three months from the date the article was written. He mentioned that certain groups might have an advantage because there is only a certain amount of time that one can prepare. He says that certain groups already took a head start in running in the election. This could relate to Amy Chua’s article where she talks about violence because of democracy. If a certain group holds all the power then the others will begin to backlash. Amy Chua talks about just that in her article, backlash. She says that the minorities that hold the government and economic power and that cause others to hate and backlash. Amy Chua’s aunt was murdered for just that reason. The motive for her murder was listed as revenge. Meaning that people are so angry that they don’t have the power that they wish that they resorted to violence. Everything that Amy Chua talks about comes back to democracy. She says with democracy, there is often one main group that is in charge and holds the power.
With Egypt there is hope that they will build and gain stability and development. There is hope through democracy, there just has to be majority vote. If there is a minority vote in rule it will not work. There needs to be the people’s leader in charge in order for democracy to be successful.
“Islamists head for win in Tunisia's Arab Spring vote,” was an article adapted from reuters.com. Tarek Amara and Christian Lowe discusses the Tunisia's moderate Islamist parties a victory in the country's first election. This article reminded me of the time period when our constitution was written. Islam is at the birth of a new freedom. I found it extremely interesting that this was the first time people had control over who would control the country. Up until now the controllers just pushed them selves and their beliefs on the citizens. This is not the best way to go about doing things by any means but it would eliminate the problems that revolve around democracy. Democracy cannot please all of the people. Some will be un happy with the results of the elections. They often become frustrated with the new elected officials and how they govern the country because they did not want them in office. A perfect example to this is in our country president Obama. There is a group of citizen who did not want him in office, but they are respectful towards him until the next election.
Many individuals are very excited about the election, but there are those who are skeptical. Spectics were claiming fraud in the election results. This in directly relates to Chua’s claim that democracy cannot fix the worlds problems. Chua believes that the collision of markets and democracy leads to hatred of individuals in different social classes. Markets target a different group of individuals then democracy does. Markets are large corporations that strive for there success even on the expense of others. On the other hand democracy will take the simplest of minded individuals and his vote counts equally to a wealthy, educated person. This causes a major collision in the peoples interests.
I personally feel that the biggest flaw in democracy is that all of the people do not receive honest information to make educated decisions. They hear sound bites on the news and in the media, but not know enough to come up with there own opinion. Chua discusses this is regards to the people of the markets education because they usually have enough knowledge to form an opinion. Markets have labor unions that support them and the labor unions pressure their members to vote on issues that favor the market.
This article was a positive light that shed on democracy. It indirectly supported some of Chua’s claims. Even though there were claims that Chua made that this article complicates.
Jamaal Franklin
In response to “Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say” by Amr Eman, I agree that developing a better constitution and adding a presidential power system would be beneficial to the country of Egypt. By passing the powers over to an elected president it would certainly provide the two elements Egypt is looking for which are stability and development. It will be easy to replicate and implement because it is the same type of system United States of America use, thus they know the system is capable of working and creating stability.
By creating a president system and adding a few amendments it will bring organization to Egypt. It would set the expectation of how individuals are supposed to behave. Everyone would be under the same rules and can be regulated evenly. This clearly would organize and unite the country as whole and instead of many individuals under different powers. In other countries without organization and general rules to abide usually falls to chaos and tyranny. Thus this is a very positive step in the right direction and would effectively allow Egypt to more likely avoid the tyranny situation.
Also by electing a president, someone who can be in charge of enforcing the rules and leading the organization will disregard individuals challenging others for authority. Therefore a president, chief of command, would be a great addition to the developing a constitutional system. The country of Egypt would be very similar to the United States in a democratic system where leaders are appointed and chosen. This is definitely an efficient system because we have been using it for centuries. Even though it is not perfect, it is still very effective and could lead Egypt into the correct direction.
Only a few months ago, Egypt was in complete turmoil. The government was corrupt, rioting was occurring in the streets, stores were robbed, and city blocks set ablaze. No one was sure of whether the protests would be successful; and if so, how long it would take. Thankfully, in early 2011, Hosni Mubarak stepped down as president. Currently, the military is in control of the government until a new long-term solution is found. However, it is very likely that soon new democratic elections will take place. Although writer Amy Chua believes that it is bad for American Democracy based governments to be used in other countries, more often than not it works out much better than a totalitarian dictatorship. Especially in this case, one of the prevailing complaints about Mubarak’s regime was his lack of term limits and limiting of democratic representation. An American-stylized democracy allows for a fair majority vote with a lot of flexibility to better apply itself to any kind of culture. For example, Egyptians plan to adopt the idea of term limits by stating that a president can only serve for two years before a reelection takes place. This is because one of their prevailing complaints about the old political system was the lack of term limits. Democracy can be tweaked with adding on extra laws too. In Australia, they believe that everyone’s participation in government is essential so it is illegal not to vote. Elsewhere, many countries have borrowed from other styles of government and applied it to democracy. Most of the countries in Europe have socialized healthcare and medicine drawing off of communist ideas, but keeping a base democratic government. Because of democracy’s flexibility, I believe Chua’s argument is invalid. Any nation in which democracy is not working properly has other prevailing problems that were preexisting or failed to adopt the government properly.
Upon looking at all of these possible articles, my eyes were instantly drawn to the article about the Iraq elections. With Iraq having played such an important role in American life over the past decade, I use every opportunity available to educate myself further on this prominent issue. Setting up a first democracy in a nation is never easy. And with proud people, and those prone to violent attacks on others, this can be a very dangerous thing to attempt to do. The article explains that there are two possible leaders for the country of Iraq, Nuri Kamal al-Maliki, and Ayad Allawi. Both of these men have emerged as forerunners for these elections. However, it has been extremely difficult for either of these men to achieve a true majority vote.
The author explains that this is due to the fact that one candidate is backed by the Shiite community, and the other is backed by the Sunni community. Also, the simple danger present while voting has also been successful at deterring people from the poles. For example, the author explained that during this election period, thirty-eight people were killed and these killings were directly linked to the election.
This may seem like a lost cause to many, but the only way to stop this cycle is to instate a powerful democracy. If a democracy can be successfully set up in these nations, they will become much more self sufficient, and eventually become much safer in the way government is run.
In addition, with the possible implementation of a new tentative democracy in Iraq, this means that the troops may be coming home on the scheduled time before Christmas. I am all for countries establishing democracies, but I am certainly not for deploying troops to help thee countries do this. This method is extremely dangerous for our soldiers, and it can also lead to a dependency on the country helping. I am all for helping these nations to achieve a true democratic government, but if that comes at the expense of the lives of hundreds of people my own age, I say what’s the point.
Kari Mitchell RWS 200 10 am In the New York Times article, "Iraq Elections," it talked about Iraq's elections on a new prime minister and a new parliament in an attempt to reduce the turmoil in the country. However, it actually increased. After further negotiation there was another election that they hoped would represent the Sunnis more, but it was postponed due to ethnic conflict. The dispute was between the Shiites and the Sunnis and eventually it was agreed the Mr. Maliki and Mr. Allawi would share a vague power agreement. This relates to Chua's claim that ethnic disputes cause violence in government. On the March 7 election day many people attended and violence struck leaving 38 dead. It was so bad that after the election there were many accusations of fraud which led to chaos when trying to disclose the results. In Chua's article mostly described two ethnic groups , one being the minority having conflicts with majority. She uses the whites in Zimbabwe and the Chinese in the Philippines as examples when explaining the feelings the majority toward the minority and their resulting actions. She explains how the Chinese are a wealthy minority in the Philippines and many go missing and are killed because of the resentment the natives feel. Seeing these foreign people have big houses and live in luxury, while you serve them or live in poor conditions causes one to action against these foreigners. Chua's own aunt was killed by her chauffeur making this issue a personal for her. I understand their feelings, but I believe there are other ways to deal with them than kidnapping and murder. I gave an analogy in my Chua free write where there is a wealthy foreigner that becomes your roommate and has all these expensive things that you are not allowed to touch and doesn't clean up after themselves or help out with the housely chores. Obviously there would be some issues in the house with your fellow roommates and this foreigner and if it got bad enough maybe even violence would occur. The Iraq Election article relates to this because the minority in Iraq are the Sunnis and the majority are the Shiites and trying to get both represented properly when electing political officials causes both turmoil and compromises.
Tunisia has just recently adopted a new form of a democratic government. Within the first year of adoption, Islamists had started to gain power in the country after formerly being banned. They not only started to gain power, but became claimed a victory in Tunisia. The transformation of a new democratic government by Tunisia is an example of globalization, as Amy Chua discusses in her article. It is the spread of embracement of new ideas across the world. With globalization, there are positive and negative effects that are caused.
Amy Chua claims that globalization of democracy causes short-term problems. She argues that the new democracies develop ethical battles between the citizens. In Tunisia’s case, Chua’s claim is strengthened because the country already shows that establishment for ethical issues, through the first election. The fear of the lack of women’s rights has already become a concern. With various religions, religious practices have the potential to be altered by different voting aftermaths. Even though all citizens are able to participate in voting, unethical decisions can still be made. America has shown in the past that it had a similar outcome when a democracy had its first appearance in the country. The Jim Crow Laws were created, which were voted by the people, and affected African-Americans in an extremely negative way.
Another problem that has begun in Tunisia is the appearance of voting fraud. This creates an unfair advantage for whatever party the fraud is influencing. Although Tunisia was able to get rid of their dictatorship and develop a democracy, but there are conflicts that are going to form, at least at the beginning of their government reconstruction. Different citizens, due to anger they feel about the presence of fraud in recent voting, are already forming protests. The election officials argued that there were only minor violations, but it seems to be more substantial. There is a possibility that forty percent of the seats in the assembly were influenced.
I chosed to read the NEw York Times article, Elections in Egypt by the Fall, Leaders Say, Where I found Amr Emam discussing the issues with the election that was being held in Egypt. Their efforts were to incorporate a constitution and have them create presidential elections into their government. The idea of this action was the thought that bringing in a presidency will bring stability and help with development. The constitution that was there befor did not have any term lengths that the presidents' had to follow. Also that there will be a state religon which for them was Islam. Amy Chua claims that relationship with free market democracy and ethnic violence was tied up with the process of globalization. She strongly supports her claim by stating that many people believe that more markets and democracy throughout the world will lead to a cure for hatred and ethnic violence. The issue with the the new constitution and the following election in Egypt is the incorporation of democracy into the government. The point of the citizens voting for a president is the main focus of democracy and what they are attempting to do. Also, Egypt will have two chambers of parliament. It has the responsibilty of drafting a constitution then followuing after it must be approved after the fact. Having them state that Egypt will make Islam the main stable religion, Emam is displaying that a certain specific ethnic group will have power over the other religious groups juyst base on the fact that their religon means more because it is the one that the government adheres to. Chua believes that “global markets are bitterly perceived as reinforcing American wealth and dominance” (67). The people that were bveing ignored in the past will now actually have a voice in this governemnt if everything goes the way it is plan to. Most places this is an excellent thing but not everyone can work the same. Reading Chua's article that was made very clear. Only time will tell whether this will work well or fail horribly. The thought that this will work is better than it failing just because they made this switch to better their lives.
ANTHONY BALOCCO
In the New York Times article “Iraq Elections,” the author discusses how the nation of Iraq held elections in 2010 for a new parliament and prime minister. He also details how this election was perhaps the most popular and most successful out of all other elections ever held in the country. However, although many people showed up despite bombs and rockets in Baghdad, the election might have actually fueled the political turmoil of Iraq rather than resolve it. Since the seats were divided 89 to 91, there was a major disagreement, particularly between the Sunni and Shiite factions. This shows how that even after the US invaded the country and attempted in implement democracy, there is still much work that needs to be done to ensure stability. Amy Chua, author of the article “A World on Edge,” would agree that immediate implementation of democracy isn’t the best solution for many countries. This is evident in examples of many countries holding new democratic elections, especially in Iraq. In 2006 the country took months of arguing and debating to finally settle on an agreement fir the prime minister. This may, however, be the fault of the type of “democracy” that was implemented. Instead of choosing leaders directly, the voters had to vote for members of parliament, who would then choose the prime minister. I think that the elections would have ran much more smoothly if the people were able to choose a prime minister directly. This would eliminate the possibility of any questionable activity taking place in the government/parliament and would probably make the people feel like their actually making a difference. While Chua may disagree with implementing democracy at first, I believe it can be a good strategy if done correctly and the people of the country are willing. If they are not willing to have their country turned democratic, perhaps it is not the best solution for them. Why force a country to do something they don’t want to do when the goal is to help them? I think if we are more careful with other countries and tailor to their needs a little more, the countries that need help will be much better off than they are now.
In "Election in Egyptian By The Fall", it's clear that Egypt has begun to create their country around a democracy type system. They have things like a constitution created and voting times which determines their president and have even passed an amount of time someone may serve as president. Though the new constitution has something things contained from it's old ones, which may not really benefit the country, they are still moving into a more of a democratic society.
With that said, Amy Chua's claims are ones that say democracy should be spread, but will end in ultimate destruction if forced upon. If we were to go into Egypt and force them into a tight and precise democratic system, things may have been different for the country now. For instance, they decided upon an idea that a president could serve for two terms, which both consisted of 8 years. If the US were to strictly enforce the idea that it should be two terms, 4 years each - they may have never came up to that idea.
Chua's ideas are showed that democracy can and work on it's own if willing. If the US was to go into Egypt and force everything upon them, their ideas concerning the system they have now may not have worked they way it did. It was fine for things to play out on their own, a country has to be willing to change and develop - like Egypt.
Post a Comment