an ethics post

So I mis-read the instructions, and I didn’t post about ethics in my first post. This post is a hybrid of make-up for the first post + strong feelings towards this topic.

Topic: ‘Freedom and Democracy”

Link: http://www.economist.com/world/international/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15270960

Firstly, I do think the West has built in certain associations within the English language. We simply associate ‘good’ with ‘freedom’, and ‘freedom’ with ‘democracy’. While I think there is a more objective argument to support democracy, I also think it is ethically wrong to intrude into what other countries find to be the optimum strategy of political rule.

Political freedom, I think, is less possible in a country like China. Imagine having all 23 provinces voting for a single leader. Such a wide-scale election would not only be impractical, but it is likely to produce undesirable results. What if a demagogue without skill became leader and drove the country into chaos? At the very least, now, with China’s one party state, the chosen leader is competent and capable in leading a country. Not all countries are suited for democracy.

This brings on the question of ethics, for why should Western society constantly promote democracy and good to be one of the same? It’s not the truth. Certainly, democracy is associated with freedom (although this is merely Majority’s Tyranny as shown by the article), but should freedom or ‘Majority’s Tyranny’ be associated with good? I leave you to answer that. For now, I will conclude by asserting that they are not one of the same, and that we should not always think ‘free’ is the same as ‘good’ in every situation.