Why a Democratic Iraq Will never Succeed: Recipe for Disastor...

[Zygote]

Democracy is a system of majority rules.

Iraq has large ethnic divides. Many of these groups have strong ties and relationships to other large scale nations, like the Shiites and Iran, that support these divisions.

The political forum empowers one group to benefit at the expense of minorities.

Shiite plurality, and therefore dominance, invites prior Iranian influence (which was mostly foreign aid to formerly oppressed Shiite citizens) to convert into politically dominating factions. Iran as a regional player incurs further benefits in defending against foreign intrusion by over seas nations. Iranian funds and man power that once went to social aid, as indicated, begins to flow towards efforts for and maintenance of societal dominance.

Lets also not forget that there are lots of vital public services and resources that are at play.

So, with power and resources stripped, incentives for minorities to improve political standing by means of insurgency are abundant.

As a result of the above, a civil war is virtually inevitable.


The solution?

Marketize and privatize. Get rid of the political forum that is being pursued for the control and dominance of one ethnic group over another. In addition, privatizing resources is an important step. Oil for example, should be dealt with as follows:

Issue each Iraqi citizen a share in the oil resources. Shareholders can now work to grow their wealth - perhaps divide the company or sell their shares if they wish. Why should a majority deserve full absolute control?

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
Democracy is a system of majority rules.

Iraq has large ethnic divides. Many of these groups have strong ties and relationships to other large scale nations, like the Shiites and Iran, that support these divisions.

The political forum empowers one group to benefit at the expense of minorities.

Shiite plurality, and therefore dominance, invites prior Iranian influence (which was mostly foreign aid to formerly oppressed Shiite citizens) to convert into politically dominating factions. Iran as a regional player incurs further benefits in defending against foreign intrusion by over seas nations. Iranian funds and man power that once went to social aid, as indicated, begins to flow towards efforts for and maintenance of societal dominance.

Lets also not forget that there are lots of vital public services and resources that are at play.

So, with power and resources stripped, incentives for minorities to improve political standing by means of insurgency are abundant.

As a result of the above, a civil war is virtually inevitable.


The solution?

Marketize and privatize. Get rid of the political forum that is being pursued for the control and dominance of one ethnic group over another. In addition, privatizing resources is an important step. Oil for example, should be dealt with as follows:

Issue each Iraqi citizen a share in the oil resources. Shareholders can now work to grow their wealth - perhaps divide the company or sell their shares if they wish. Why should a majority deserve full absolute control?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really think this will work right? Issuing each Iraqi a share of the oil profits??? And what's to insure they get them, as opposed to a group of people with the power to take/keep said profits.

Here's an idea (that could actually work): Just divide the country into ethnic "sections". Iraq hasn't been a country that long anyway, and with no real government to speak of, nationalism won't be much of a problem. Work from there. Might fall right back into the despotic whirlpool, but at least there's a chance of order without the ethnic groups warring.

Cody

[Zygote]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Democracy is a system of majority rules.

Iraq has large ethnic divides. Many of these groups have strong ties and relationships to other large scale nations, like the Shiites and Iran, that support these divisions.

The political forum empowers one group to benefit at the expense of minorities.

Shiite plurality, and therefore dominance, invites prior Iranian influence (which was mostly foreign aid to formerly oppressed Shiite citizens) to convert into politically dominating factions. Iran as a regional player incurs further benefits in defending against foreign intrusion by over seas nations. Iranian funds and man power that once went to social aid, as indicated, begins to flow towards efforts for and maintenance of societal dominance.

Lets also not forget that there are lots of vital public services and resources that are at play.

So, with power and resources stripped, incentives for minorities to improve political standing by means of insurgency are abundant.

As a result of the above, a civil war is virtually inevitable.


The solution?

Marketize and privatize. Get rid of the political forum that is being pursued for the control and dominance of one ethnic group over another. In addition, privatizing resources is an important step. Oil for example, should be dealt with as follows:

Issue each Iraqi citizen a share in the oil resources. Shareholders can now work to grow their wealth - perhaps divide the company or sell their shares if they wish. Why should a majority deserve full absolute control?

[/ QUOTE ]

You don't really think this will work right? Issuing each Iraqi a share of the oil profits??? And what's to insure they get them, as opposed to a group of people with the power to take/keep said profits.

Here's an idea (that could actually work): Just divide the country into ethnic "sections". Iraq hasn't been a country that long anyway, and with no real government to speak of, nationalism won't be much of a problem. Work from there. Might fall right back into the despotic whirlpool, but at least there's a chance of order without the ethnic groups warring.

Cody

[/ QUOTE ]

America got control of the oil to hand over to the Iraqi government. I'm talking about this from the perspective of US coalition policy.

[mosdef]

You may or may not be right that democracy is doomed to fail in Iraq. I agree that the political landscape there is "sectarian". But two "hopeful" concepts I would like to point out are:

1. Proportional representation democracy would not allow for a minority sect to dictate to all others.

2. The sects are creating a lot of damage with their conflict. Don't you think that the majority of people may prefer that the sectarian zealots just stop? Can democracy help that to happen?

In conclusion, the failure of democracy in Iraq may end up having a lot more to do with non-democractic foreign intervention and sectarian thuggery. I don't really see the violent removal of democratic action from an electoral system as being a failure of democracy.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
Issue each Iraqi citizen a share in the oil resources. Shareholders can now work to grow their wealth - perhaps divide the company or sell their shares if they wish. Why should a majority deserve full absolute control?

[/ QUOTE ]

Zygote I couldn't agree with you more and I've advocated this exact thing from the time Hussein was ousted. I'm afraid that you're probably correct in your assessment and that a state oil company in Iraq will preclude any kind of long run "democratic" government solution.

[GoodCallYouWin]

No one can 'plan' a safe Iraq. The U.S. should just leave these people alone and stop killing them, and allow them to develop whatever political structure they may develop. Maybe it sucks, maybe it doesn't... there's nothing you can do about it.

[jthegreat]

[ QUOTE ]
The U.S. should just leave these people alone and stop killing them

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you 12?

[Richard Tanner]

[ QUOTE ]
No one can 'plan' a safe Iraq. The U.S. should just leave these people alone and stop killing them, and allow them to develop whatever political structure they may develop. Maybe it sucks, maybe it doesn't... there's nothing you can do about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

I like this plan also. What if we took all the money we're spending on the war and invested it in developing fuel sorces that aren't oil-based. Hell we could even run a "uclear power is ok" campaign and start building those plants.

I always thought that would be a more effective use of that money. That way, in 10 years, we won't have to care about what goes on in that region any longer.

Cody

[GoodCallYouWin]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The U.S. should just leave these people alone and stop killing them

[/ QUOTE ]

Are you 12?

[/ QUOTE ]

Is it immature to ask people to stop killing people?

[2/325Falcon]

[ QUOTE ]
The U.S. should just leave these people alone and stop killing them, and allow them to develop whatever political structure they may develop. Maybe it sucks, maybe it doesn't... there's nothing you can do about it.

[/ QUOTE ]

Most Ignorant Post Of The Day. That's quite an accomplishment in this forum.