Quote (Lebanon961 @ Mar 11 2022 05:24am)
Many Americans on PARD and elsewhere often come back to the argument that America is defending "democracies", or "free countries". Or that invading a democracy is worse than invading another kind of regime.
For example, invading Iraq is not like invading Ukraine because Ukraine is a "democracy" (according to some).
Such a line of thought is often used behind a veil of political pragmatism and rational strategic calculus.
Other times the same line of thought is employed ideologically, that somehow America is doing "good" by helping "democracies".
Most American posters here have at least some idea about modern history, about how things work in the real world etc...
Most of you know that the American administration, driven by self-interest, has overthrown democracies, and supported brutal repressive regimes. There is no need to get into examples.
My question is, how come the argument for "democracies" is used so often by people who know better?
I can understand the MSM talking points to the masses... but hearing it from the more intellectually literate triggers my bullshitometer.
What is the deal?
Is it a rationalization for the idealists?
Is it a useful lie for the pragmatist that gets repeated as a patriotic initiative?
Am I missing something that hopefully will be pointed out?
I would really like to understand this case of well-informed people repeating something that does not make sense.
You "only" have 2 posts and joined yesterday, so I'm not sure you're qualified to assess what "most posters here" think.