United Democratic Nations

[Dilange]

K intelligence.

How do you think this will work? We tried the LEague of Nations which failed....United Nations which failed...

So you want to create an international organization that is only made up of democratic countries? Great pipe dream. What about the totalitarianistic governments? Are they just going to sit back and be left out of an international community? No.

Why do you think this is a good idea?

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

Excluding certain countries from an international organization isnt democratic either.

This seems like another NATO to me....not a new UN.

[Gdstark]

K intelligence.

How do you think this will work? We tried the LEague of Nations which failed....United Nations which failed...

So you want to create an international organization that is only made up of democratic countries? Great pipe dream. What about the totalitarianistic governments? Are they just going to sit back and be left out of an international community? No.

Why do you think this is a good idea?

It's a nice idea, it's just not a practical one. If you exclude nations that aren't democratic, it won't be a very effective organization or will turn into a NATO like body where one or two nations dominate the rest.

Not effective? That would depend on your objective. Mine is to simply represent a democratic process. If it only had three members and met at the local Dennys each month, I would still prefer it over an undemocratic institution (the UN). Principles count.

gary

[Sremski okrug]

K intelligence.

How do you think this will work? We tried the LEague of Nations which failed....United Nations which failed...

So you want to create an international organization that is only made up of democratic countries? Great pipe dream. What about the totalitarianistic governments? Are they just going to sit back and be left out of an international community? No.

Why do you think this is a good idea?

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

or they would create their own political union and start another cold war.

[Frenequesta]

K intelligence.

How do you think this will work? We tried the LEague of Nations which failed....United Nations which failed...

So you want to create an international organization that is only made up of democratic countries? Great pipe dream. What about the totalitarianistic governments? Are they just going to sit back and be left out of an international community? No.

Why do you think this is a good idea?

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

Since when was the UN ever intended to represent the people in those respective countries, democratic or otherwise.

No, I don't buy the idea. The world doesn't need to be all democratic for peace. And yes, I am aware of the "democratic peace theory".

[Gdstark]

Who cares about totalitarian goverments? They don't even represent their people. We can leave them in their own mess and let them cry how ''Western imperialists'' opress them.

Because world peace not only requires freedom loving nations, but totalitarian ones which present the threat. The problem is they won't be left to their own, and without dialogue, you just took the world a step backwards.

When you say "they", are you referring to the people in the totalitarian nation? Or the dictators? In my opinion we need to stop lumping these together.

And for the record, world peace will require the elimination of totalitarian governments. Not the approach being applied to Iraq, but rather the approach we see in places like Egypt and Libya...change centered from within.

gary

[Frenequesta]

Because world peace not only requires freedom loving nations, but totalitarian ones which present the threat. The problem is they won't be left to their own, and without dialogue, you just took the world a step backwards.

When you say "they", are you referring to the people in the totalitarian nation? Or the dictators? In my opinion we need to stop lumping these together.

And for the record, world peace will require the elimination of totalitarian governments. Not the approach being applied to Iraq, but rather the approach we see in places like Egypt and Libya...change centered from within.

gary

So if all totalitarian governments are just left on their own to reform from within, what's the point of a special institution just for democratic nations?

[Gdstark]

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

Since when was the UN ever intended to represent the people in those respective countries, democratic or otherwise.

No, I don't buy the idea. The world doesn't need to be all democratic for peace. And yes, I am aware of the "democratic peace theory".

You're right...the UN was never intended to be democratic. And look how poorly that's worked out. I'm proposing we try another approach...one where we aren't forced to leave our democratic principles at the door.

So you don't buy the democratic peace theory. What world peace theory do you prefer?

gary

[Gdstark]

When you say "they", are you referring to the people in the totalitarian nation? Or the dictators? In my opinion we need to stop lumping these together.

And for the record, world peace will require the elimination of totalitarian governments. Not the approach being applied to Iraq, but rather the approach we see in places like Egypt and Libya...change centered from within.

gary

So if all totalitarian governments are just left on their own to reform from within, what's the point of a special institution just for democratic nations?

I didn't say the free world shouldn't help. Pipe free internet into these totalitarian countries. Work against internet censorship. There are plenty of things free nations can do to contribute to the spread of democracy that don't involve shooting anyone.

gary

[Dilange]

Since when was the UN ever intended to represent the people in those respective countries, democratic or otherwise.

No, I don't buy the idea. The world doesn't need to be all democratic for peace. And yes, I am aware of the "democratic peace theory".

You're right...the UN was never intended to be democratic. And look how poorly that's worked out. I'm proposing we try another approach...one where we aren't forced to leave our democratic principles at the door.

So you don't buy the democratic peace theory. What world peace theory do you prefer?

gary

World Peace is just a dream people wish to happen.

In a realistic view of the world, they will always be wars and conflicts.

Sorry, but no one can make peace.

[Gdstark]

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

or they would create their own political union and start another cold war.

They are welcome to do that. Perhaps they could vote on the issues....oops...that won't work. I think you give dictators too much credit.

gary

[Frenequesta]

Since when was the UN ever intended to represent the people in those respective countries, democratic or otherwise.

No, I don't buy the idea. The world doesn't need to be all democratic for peace. And yes, I am aware of the "democratic peace theory".

You're right...the UN was never intended to be democratic. And look how poorly that's worked out. I'm proposing we try another approach...one where we aren't forced to leave our democratic principles at the door.

So you don't buy the democratic peace theory. What world peace theory do you prefer?

gary

I actually think peace is unworkable so long as there are nations that compete for resources and pride, and dishonest and greedy people in government. Armed conflict is inevitable. I'd prefer a single world government, but even that is unworkable logistically, culturally, and economically.

[Gdstark]

You're right...the UN was never intended to be democratic. And look how poorly that's worked out. I'm proposing we try another approach...one where we aren't forced to leave our democratic principles at the door.

So you don't buy the democratic peace theory. What world peace theory do you prefer?

gary

World Peace is just a dream people wish to happen.

In a realistic view of the world, they will always be wars and conflicts.

Sorry, but no one can make peace.

I'm not proposing that we arrive at a destination called "world peace". I'm suggestion that we can increase the level of peace in the world if we follow democratic principles. Democracies do not tend to wage war with other democracies. And the difference between a nation like the UN and Libya (to use a current example) is that when we change leaders less blood is spilled. That's a reasonable objective for a world.

gary

[Frenequesta]

So if all totalitarian governments are just left on their own to reform from within, what's the point of a special institution just for democratic nations?

I didn't say the free world shouldn't help. Pipe free internet into these totalitarian countries. Work against internet censorship. There are plenty of things free nations can do to contribute to the spread of democracy that don't involve shooting anyone.

gary

And if the dictator refuses to get internet in their country, we might have to resort to force in order to make it so, amirite?

And that didn't answer the question. What better can a formal body do that other nations can't accomplish on their own?

[Alyakia]

K intelligence.

How do you think this will work? We tried the LEague of Nations which failed....United Nations which failed...

So you want to create an international organization that is only made up of democratic countries? Great pipe dream. What about the totalitarianistic governments? Are they just going to sit back and be left out of an international community? No.

Why do you think this is a good idea?

Who cares about totalitarian goverments? They don't even represent their people. We can leave them in their own mess and let them cry how ''Western imperialists'' opress them.

Are you sure this isn't going to up/isn't already a "us westerners vs. them" thing?

[Sremski okrug]

or they would create their own political union and start another cold war.

They are welcome to do that. Perhaps they could vote on the issues....oops...that won't work. I think you give dictators too much credit.

gary

You do realize that non-democratic countries actively participate in the United Nations right? A Union of Un-Democratic states would function perfectly well and have the financial support of some of the largest economies like China and Saudi Arabia.

It would be a disaster. East vs West.

[Gdstark]

You're right...the UN was never intended to be democratic. And look how poorly that's worked out. I'm proposing we try another approach...one where we aren't forced to leave our democratic principles at the door.

So you don't buy the democratic peace theory. What world peace theory do you prefer?

gary

I actually think peace is unworkable so long as there are nations that compete for resources and pride, and dishonest and greedy people in government. Armed conflict is inevitable. I'd prefer a single world government, but even that is unworkable logistically, culturally, and economically.

So you don't have a counter proposal for increasing world peace. And since nations will always need resources, we will always need war. I hope you're wrong.

gary

[Gdstark]

I didn't say the free world shouldn't help. Pipe free internet into these totalitarian countries. Work against internet censorship. There are plenty of things free nations can do to contribute to the spread of democracy that don't involve shooting anyone.

gary

And if the dictator refuses to get internet in their country, we might have to resort to force in order to make it so, amirite?

And that didn't answer the question. What better can a formal body do that other nations can't accomplish on their own?

You've heard of Radio Free Europe? That was radio piped in, despite what the dictators wanted. I'm referring to a similar model for internet.

A formal body can coordinate the advancement of democracy...agree on who should host the servers supporting the free internet, etc, etc. Working in a coordinate way is always more productive than working alone. Easy answer.

gary

[The Montiarian Empire]

Totalitarianistic government would be excluded since they presumably would fail the meet the criteria for democratic governance. Are they going to just sit back? Hard to say what dictators would do, but clearly pretending that they represent people is undemocratic.

gary

or they would create their own political union and start another cold war.

Right, because the Soviet Union went so well.

[Gdstark]

They are welcome to do that. Perhaps they could vote on the issues....oops...that won't work. I think you give dictators too much credit.

gary

You do realize that non-democratic countries actively participate in the United Nations right? A Union of Un-Democratic states would function perfectly well and have the financial support of some of the largest economies like China and Saudi Arabia.

It would be a disaster. East vs West.

Like I said, dictators are free to form whatever organizations they like. That's already true today. The UDN idea is not about splitting the world East to West...it's about splitting the world between Democracy and Dictatorship. And helping move the world from the latter to the former.

gary

[Rhingland]

To promote democracy and human rights is a task for organisations like the EU in Europe or Unasur in Southamerica. They raise social standarts and peace in their region and also bordering countrys.. which often want to become members too and in the process must change! They convince by example.
..and we must learn that the western way may not be the best for everyone. Democracy will not just "kick in" because we want to.. people must learn what it is and how not to screw it.

[Gdstark]

To promote democracy and human rights is a task for organisations like the EU in Europe or Unasur in Southamerica. They raise social standarts and peace in their region and also bordering countrys.. which often want to become members too and in the process must change! They convince by example.
..and we must learn that the western way may not be the best for everyone. Democracy will not just "kick in" because we want to.. people must learn what it is and how not to screw it.

Lead by example...absolutely. And the goal of a United Democratic Nations should not just be to spread democracy, but also to improve existing ones.

gary

[Charlotte Ryberg]

I think it is likely to coexist in my opinion because the UN still remains important regardless of ideology. Lead by example...absolutely. Democracies were there for a reason: simply so that we can find the people we can trust.

[Gdstark]

I think it is likely to coexist in my opinion because the UN still remains important regardless of ideology. Lead by example...absolutely. Democracies were there for a reason: simply so that we can find the people we can trust.

When you say that the UN is still important, can you give an example?

gary

[Rhingland]

I think it is likely to coexist in my opinion because the UN still remains important regardless of ideology. Lead by example...absolutely. Democracies were there for a reason: simply so that we can find the people we can trust.

When you say that the UN is still important, can you give an example?

gary

It´s like a parliament for the whole world. And there are "parties" for diffrent worldviews.. even if they can´t really decide much it´s a place to hear other opinions and find new friends
..like when Russia, France and Germany argued against the invasion of iraq. It´s not all about democracy.. sometimes "good" and "bad" guys stand together against the opinion of other "good" guys. Dictatorships have the right to be heard too!

[Sremski okrug]

You do realize that non-democratic countries actively participate in the United Nations right? A Union of Un-Democratic states would function perfectly well and have the financial support of some of the largest economies like China and Saudi Arabia.

It would be a disaster. East vs West.

Like I said, dictators are free to form whatever organizations they like. That's already true today. The UDN idea is not about splitting the world East to West...it's about splitting the world between Democracy and Dictatorship. And helping move the world from the latter to the former.

gary

and splitting it down these lines would create un-needed conflict.