Bush em Londres

“The failure of democracy in Iraq would throw its people back into misery and turn that country over to terrorists who wish to destroy us”

A "falha de democracia" e "voltar à miséria" não são necessáriamente fatalidades. A possibilidade de terroristas tomarem conta do Iraque só existe por causa da destruição do regime.

"In a friendly jab at France, Bush noted how a 14-point plan for peace that President Woodrow Wilson took to Britain in 1918 was met with skepticism by the prime minister of France, who complained then that even God himself “only had 10 commandments.”

Tendo em conta que Woodrow Wilson proclamava, entre muitos pontos, o direito à auto-determinação dos povos, numa Europa que estava em ruinas...depois, o próprio Congresso Americano rejeitou quer o Tratado de Versailles quer a Liga das Nações.

O problema dos Kurdos e em geral, de todo o médio oriente vem precisamente das cinzas da sua gloriosa "guerra para acabar com todas as guerras", incluindo o desenho do Iraque (com sunis, shiitas, kurdos e turcomanos artificialmente a fazerem parte do mesmo estado-nação) e onde "desenharam" um Koweit independente - desde sempre reivindicado pelo Estado Iraquiano (não é que concorde ou que sirva de desculpa para a invasão em 91, por mim e por principio geral, se onde existe um Estado, passar a existirem 2 ou 3, é sempre positivo).

"Bush invoked Europe’s history of appeasement of dictators, reminding his audience of the critical work the Allies did to set postwar Germany on the path to democracy"

Lembrando-nos nós dos ditadores que já foram apoiados pela politica externa americana (e onde - voltando ao ponto anterior - alguns até conheceram o crescimento económico acelerado), sempre é preciso lembrar que Hitler participou em eleições na Alemanha, e diga-se até, que a grande recuperação económica da Alemanha no pós-2ªGuerra, aconteceu essencialmente no periodo de tempo que decorreu até novamente passarem a ter democracia, onde foi notada a influência do economista da escola austriaca Wilhelm Röpke.

E depois, nem mesmo no Japão é absolutamente verdade que só conheceram a democracia apenas no pós-2ª Grande Guerra.

Sobre: Wilhelm Röpke (1899-1966): Humane Economist

Through the Society, Röpke was able to meet with and influence the thinking of Ludwig Erhard, economic minister and Chancellor of West Germany. Erhard later revealed that during World War II he was able to illegally obtain Röpke's books, which he "devoured like the desert the life-giving water." The product of Röpke's influence on Erhard has been tagged the post-WW II "German Economic Miracle," although Röpke pointed out that the economic success experienced by West Germany was not a miracle at all; it was the result of adopting correct social and legal institutions fostering the market economy. Looking back at the West German economic policies of the 1950s, he lamented that free market reforms had not gone far enough.

Também muito actual a sua opinião de que:

"A supernational or multinational government is not likely to embrace the liberal ideal because a political regime insulates itself from the people it rules. It grows increasingly oppressive and corrupt, raising up welfare states and trampling on private property. For this reason, the centralization of decision-making power is incompatible with free market economies. As the alternative, Röpke embraced the 19th century "universalist-liberal" solution to the problem of an international order: vibrant commerce between politically autonomous small states. In order to allow for international trade to take place, a truly international monetary system is necessary. Instead of a world-wide currency, national currencies backed by a non-political gold standard should serve as the arbiter of exchange."

E já que temos estado a falar sobre democracia, europa e federalismo:

"The decentralization of the political process, Röpke argued, is incompatible with mass democracy. Under democracy, politicians are prone to be swayed by masses of privately interested voters, so that the economic system degenerates into a spoils system where the victors are the mass that can muster 51 per cent of the vote. Such a system only serves to bring about and legitimize centralized power. The only legitimate government is a government by rulers that are widely recognized as competent and socially beneficial. If the political system is decentralized, those that are the most capable and are recognized as possessing the most integrity would be those who the various locales would allow to rule for any length of time. "