A Formula for World Peace and Prosperity
 eace on Earth. We hear it so often it has become an empty platitude. What will it really take for world peace? There are a few possible routes to world peace. Let's start by posing a question. When was the last time two democracies squared off on the battlefield? If there is a good example, let me know. Any type of Saddam Hussien style democracy doesn't count. Saddam or Fidel Castro winning an election with 99.9% of the votes doesn't even warrant analysis. Since 1776 has there been any true democracies that have gone to war with one another? Hitler was never elected, Paul von Hindenberg appointed him as chancellor of his coalition cabinet and Hitler used his Machiavellian skills to sweep the Nazi party into power in the Reichstag, which then granted Hitler dictatorial powers. Many countries in Africa claim to be democracies but voter fraud and voter intimidation in Africa make hanging chads in Florida look mild by comparison. Most communist countries that claim to have free elections also have laws allowing one political party. The only situation that comes close to two democracies going to war is India and Pakistan, but by examining Musharraf's rise to power in Pakistan there is little to indicate he is a leader freely chosen by a free people.
So is worldwide democracy the key to world peace? There is more to it than that. Stable democracies incorporate some form of free market capitalism. Free market capitalism provides much of the motivation for avoiding war. Two free-market, capitalist, democracies have a vested interest in not going to war. War does not boost economies and the cost in lives and resources is typically far greater than the benefit of an increase in defense spending or any spoils of war. For example, there may ideological and political differences between France and The United States, even some hatred, but it is highly unlikely that the US and France would ever resort to military warfare to settle their differences because the costs are too high compared to any benefits. When ideologies are diametrically opposed however, the likelihood of war increases. Socialism and communism in their various forms draw their appeal by creating a semblance of differences between people. Throughout history, socialist and communist style governments have been imposed through force by ruling elites, they have never been freely chosen by a populace. Capitalism and democracy are all-inclusive by nature and draw their appeal from people's commonalities.
A free-market, capitalist democracy will, however, go to war with a non-free-market, non-capitalist or non-democratic country because the cost and threat to the free way of life is worth the cost of defending, as in the case of the War on Terror. The actual cost in terms of lives and money of the terrorist attacks on September 11 is incalculable and will continue for many years. Whatever the final cost of the overall War on Terror is, the alternative, to not bear the cost and lose the War on Terror is simply not an option because free-market, capitalistic democracy would cease to exist.
Free market capitalism is vital to world peace. Within free market capitalism is the equal opportunity for any individual, regardless of race, religion or nationality for self-determination and to earn as much money as they need to live a life that they themselves deem dignified. Where some countries make mistakes is in trying to enforce some hybrid of capitalism and socialism that ends up ruining it for everyone. There should be no guarantees of results in any capitalist system, just a guarantee of opportunity. The productive segment of society should not be punished by repressive or progressive tax schemes; rather the unproductive segment of society should become productive. Frederic Bastiat wrote in his timeless classic The Law, "And if everyone enjoyed the unrestricted use of his faculties and the free disposition of the fruits of his labor, social progress would be ceaseless, uninterrupted, and unfailing."
A rule of law applied fairly and equally to all provides the level playing field for a capitalist society. A fairly administered and non-intrusive rule of law provides equality. This includes a simple and expeditious system for establishing property rights. These property rights of course should apply fairly and equally to all individuals, again regardless of race, religion or nationality. Establishing property rights allows individuals to unlock the capital that is contained in the value of their property. Robert Mugabe has plunged his country into financial ruin and famine by not respecting property rights. By giving land to people that didn't pay for it or earn it in an attempt to correct some social injustice, Mugabe has stripped the land of its capital value and has made it unproductive. It is unproductive because the people that have been given the land have not paid any price for the land and therefore have no incentive to use it to produce food profitably.
The law and tax structure should also be applied fairly and equally across the board to all individuals regardless of race, religion, nationality and income. Bastiat put it best when he wrote, "When law and force keep a person within the bounds of justice, they impose nothing but a mere negation. They oblige him only to abstain from harming others. They violate neither his personality, his liberty, nor his property. They safeguard all of these. They are defensive; they defend equally the rights of all."
Capitalism, the rule of law, and finally, democracy can ensure world peace. A true representative democracy that legally gives individuals the opportunity to choose their leaders for a pre-set term and remove their leaders when necessary protects against tyranny and injustice. These leaders are responsible to provide for the defense of the rights of all that they lead, not to socially engineer some convoluted worldview that only benefits a segment of society. What is often forgotten though in this type of democracy is that the chosen leaders work for all the people, regardless of which segment of society elected the leader to office. Once in office the leader becomes a servant to the people, serving the needs of all the people, not just certain segments that the leader identifies with as an individual. A leader as servant is a very humbling yet powerful concept. If a leader thinks and behaves as a servant to all the people of society, war would only need to be provided as a service to the people when the people's rights are threatened, as the rights of the people of the United States were threatened on September 11, 2001.
The one fly in the ointment is terrorism. Terrorist organizations make their bases of operations in free and non-free nations alike all over the world. Most often, these terrorist groups are effectively outside the reach of the authorities of their host nations. Regardless of how prosperous or free the individual nations of the world become there will always be fringe, extremist groups of people that will illogically and ignorantly reject any society or government that does not conform to their worldview. History has proven there is little or no opportunity to resolve differences with these groups diplomatically through peaceful means. Therefore, from time to time it will be necessary to forcibly and militarily negotiate and remove these rogue elements, since what they fight against is not tyranny, but freedom itself. Islamic fundamentalist terrorists are not fighting for freedom; they are attempting to violently impose their views of how the world should look onto the lovers and protectors of freedom. While this view could be criticized as simplistic, there is simply no positive end that can be achieved through the murder, maiming or terrorizing of an innocent civilian population. The governments of free societies have a duty and an obligation to protect the rights of the societies they serve.
In the final analysis, world peace is possible. Regardless of culture or religion; capitalism, democracy and the rule of law are systems that inherently operate without discrimination and provide liberty for all participants. Once every individual has an equal opportunity to pursue his or her dreams in a free and democratic marketplace, the only legitimate reason for war would be to put down the occasional maniacal and ignorant extremist and in that case it would not be nation on nation war. If these elements were implemented throughout the entire world, there would be no logical reason left for war. .
|
|
