The Future of Freedom: Fareed Zakaria February 21, 2007
Posted by Greg Jerome in Books, Politics.trackback
I just finish reading The Future of Freedom: Illiberal Democracy at Home and Abroad by Fareed Zakaria. It is an examination of the roots of Democracy and Liberalism, the ways they have functioned throughout history, current problems, and future solutions. I will make this part I of a min-series looking at some of the ideas in the book.
Zakaria defines Democracy as people power; people having the right to vote and participate in democracy. More participation equals more democracy. He views Liberalism in the classic sense; the broadening of individual rights: life, liberty, and property. Democracy and Liberalism may or may not go hand in hand. A country can have elections and still limit personal freedoms. In contrast, personal freedoms can be expanded without free elections. The author makes this distinction using China and Russian as examples on page 91.
As of now, however, the two countries are on somewhat different paths. China has moved to reform its economy and, very slowly, other aspects of its legal and administrative system, but it has taken few steps to introduce democracy. Russia, by contrast, moved first and most quickly on political reform…To oversimplify, China is reforming its economics before its politics, whereas Russia did the reverse.
This distinction between Democracy and Liberalism (individual rights) is important. It may feel counter-intuitive since we live in a country with a great deal of both, but these trends can and do develop at different speeds in different countries with vastly different results.
It is interesting to look at current events through the lens of Democracy v. Liberalism. What does Iraq have right now? It certainly has democracy. The people have voted many times in the past few years. Does it have liberty?
The government has grant liberty through freedoms of speech, assembly, etc. Elections have created a government divided by religious sects vying for power and oil money. At the local level these sects are denying liberty, and even life, to members of the opposite sect. The sectarian militias most certainly are trying to take away liberty and impose their view of the world on the population. At the national level the Maliki government has sheltered the Shia fighters and cracked down on the Sunnis.
Iraq has some democracy but it’s status as a Liberal state is certainly in doubt.
Part II: The history of Democracy and Liberalism, coming up.
greg,
good post, sounds like an interesting book. i agree that iraque has no liberalism, but i doudt if it will ever be truly democratic.
Dear Fareed Zakaria,
I always believe that the norms of history have been written in the interest of ex empire, say British and later America.Now hostory should and ought to be written by emerging nations(peoples history).No body else than Indian(say Gandhi) can think so clearly what human right ist.Your writing I like because you show the hipocracy of the falling super power and you tried to vie them options..I will appreciate
if I could get direct your e-mail address.I wish to give you some points time to time, may be that will help me to clean my mind, saying more precisely I have tried to communicate.We need to understand
for some people is called” Liberalisation and for other people is death”.
In our country when it rains Frogs come out and bell, children throw stones on Frog ,in the name of freedom anf enjoyment and for frogs it is death.
We have to make clear for every nation it has to to be made for the interest of that nation and for the people, of the people.If in Iraq we
call Democracy is achieved,we have to change to meaninf of the word hypocracy.I wish your direct comment on it.My e-mail address
wahab-trading@t-online.de
It is like you want to write Tagore`s song you want to write in english.
thanking you
wahab kamal