THE DEMOCRATIC PEACE CLOCK
http://www.hawaii.edu/powerkills/DP.CLOCK.HTM
Now is the dawning of a new world. The democratic peace has kicked in and global violence is waning; and nearly five hours to universal peace and security.
What is the democratic peace?
It is the web of factual propositions that:
Democracies do not make war on each other.
The more two nations are democratic, the less their mutual violence.
Democracies have the least foreign violence.
Democracies have, by far, the least internal violence.
Modern democracies have virtually no democide (genocide and mass murder)
Putting all this together, democracy is a method of nonviolence. And therefore, the democratic peace.
Sounds good to me.
But wait there's more.
What is the democratic peace clock (DPC)?
This measures democratic progress in the world and thus, how close we are to eliminating war and democide (genocide and mass murder), and minimizing other forms of collective violence. Each percent increase in the percent of the world population democratic is an advancement in the clock of 58.2 seconds--virtually a minute. Midnight, the darkest time of night, was when there were no democracies and thus, violence and turmoil encompassed the whole world. High noon will be when the sun shines full on the world, and when the entire world will be democratic, and therefore, the world will be at peace. In 1950, 31 percent of the world's population was democratic, which was not yet a sufficient percent to effect world peace as a whole. On the DPC the time was 3:43AM, still a time of deep night. In 2000, however, there were 120 electoral democracies, or a democratic world population of 58.2 percent, more than half the world, and this was now having a great positive force on world peace (to be shown empirically below). The DPC was at 6:59AM, and it's dawn. As of 2001, The Gambia entered the list of democracies, raising the number to 121 electoral democracies out of 194 countries. There are 86 liberal democracies enjoying civil and political rights.
NOTE: I have updated the clock and count of democracies to mid-2006 here. By then the clock had advanced to 8:15AM.
From Democratic Peace Blog:
Political Freedom vs. Economic Freedom and Wealth
http://democraticpeace.wordpress.com/tag/economic-freedom/
Obviously, there is a close relationship, as by theory there should be. One cannot dominate a free market with a government dictated economy without destroying freedom in the process. Note that even the so-called “people’s republic of Sweden” is indexed as being economically free in the Heritage Foundation/Wall Street Journal index. So is Denmark, and so-called “socialist” Israel is indexed as mostly economically free.
Then, what about the economic development, or what I prefer to call the wealth of a nation, and welfare of a people. The next chart shows the close relationship between the Freedom House ratings and various measure of wealth and welfare.
There you have it. Political and Economic freedom not only go together, but also they are an engine of a people’s wealth and welfare. Add this to the fact the democratically free countries never have had a famine, virtually never murder their own people, have the least internal violence, and never any wars between them, and you have freedom as the closest thing to a general solution to humanity’s ills.
Three cheers for freedom. Okay, you freedomists out there, to work.
I would just ask myself, on which path do we appear to be headed?
More free or less free?
More wealth or less wealth?
And if wealth is linked to our welfare and security, then why shouldn't we be concerned about the direction we are heading?
And what are the future consequences?
and further,
”Testing Whether Freedom Predicts Human Security and Violence (2001) By R.J. Rummel, Appendix to Saving Lives, enriching Life: Freedom as a Right and a Moral Good
In this appendix, I did a variety of mathematical and statistical operations to test the hypothesis that freedom predicts to human security and violence. The conclusion:
For all nations 1997 to 1998, the human security of their people, their human and economic development, the violence in their lives, and the political instability of their institutions, is theoretically and empirically dependent on their freedom–their civil rights and political liberties, rule of law, and the accountability of their government. One can well predict a people’s human security by knowing how free they are.
Moreover, just considering the violence, instability, and total deaths a people can suffer, the more freedom they have the less of this they endure. This is to say:
Even if we just improve the human rights of a people, even if we promote some democratization of their political institutions, it will improve their human security, and reduce the violence that inflicts them.
These blogs are run by a fellow by the name of Rudy (R.J.) Rummell, who is a a Professor Emeritus of Political Science at the University of Hawaii.
One of his blogs mentions that he has been nominated for the Nobel Peace Prize.
I suppose one can only wonder--after reviewing some of his work--why he has not actually won a Nobel Peace Prize. Maybe after seeing whom they choose to waste their time honoring and the narrative of Rummels' views (pro-democaracy, pro-America), perhaps wonder may be suspended.
According to Rummel, that there is a correlation between political power and democide.
(He defines democide as murder by government).
Political mass murder grows increasingly common as political power becomes unconstrained. (Again what path are we on? Are we there yet?).
At the other end of the scale, where power is diffuse, checked, and balanced, political violence is a rarity.
(Oh yes, checks and balances, it seems like I heard about that once in school. Maybe when we learned about the Constitution and how a bill becomes law and all that those other brilliant, founding concepts that todays group of criminally corrupt and morally and ethically bankrupt politicians seem to want to trample over or ignore.)
"The more power a regime has, the more likely people will be killed. This is a major reason for promoting freedom."
(Good reason)
He concludes: "Concentrated political power is the most dangerous thing on earth."
(Amen to that brother!!)
To where the alternate path may lead, I don't know. But why take any chances?
"With all [our] blessings, what more is necessary to make us a happy and a prosperous people? Still one thing more, fellow citizens--a wise and frugal Government, which shall restrain men from injuring one another, shall leave them otherwise free to regulate their own pursuits of industry and improvement, and shall not take from the mouth of labor the bread it has earned. This is the sum of good government, and this is necessary to close the circle of our felicities." - Thomas Jefferson: 1st Inaugural, 1801. ME 3:320
"Repeal that [welfare] law, and you will soon see a change in
their manners. ... Six days shalt thou labor, though one of
the old commandments long treated as out of date, will again be
looked upon as a respectable precept; industry will increase,
and with it plenty among the lower people; their circumstances
will mend, and more will be done for their happiness by inuring
them to provide for themselves, than could be done by dividing
all your estates among them." - Benjamin Franklin
No comments:
Post a Comment