The World & I Online Magazine, ONline Archive and Educational Resource  
World & I School | World & I Homeschool | World & I College | World & I Library
Username:   Password:      Subscribe Now   Register   About Us | Contact Us | FAQs      
The World & I Archive Peoples of the World Book Reviews Worldwide Folktales Fathers of Faith
Search  
Sort by: Results Listed:
Date Range:    Advanced Search

The World & I Magazine
 
Current Issue
The Arts
Life
Natural Science
Culture
Book World
Modern Thought
  Resources
American Waves
Book Reviews
Fathers of Faith
Footsteps of Lincoln
Millennial Moments
Peoples of the World
Profiles in Character
Traveling the Globe
Writers and Writing

Can Democracy Survive an Omnilateral Conflict of Rights?


Article # : 11410 

Section : MODERN THOUGHT
Issue Date : 11 / 1986  6,606 Words
Author : Sir Alfred Sherman
Sir Alfred Sherman is a policy adviser to Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher and has written widely on global strategic and domestic policy.

       The euphoria generated by two world wars fought "to make the world safe for democracy" created powerful taboos against questioning the relevance of democracy to a majority of mankind or its likely durability in countries where it had struck root. Once democracy and universal suffrage were equated, to dare look this gift horse in the mouth was condemned as anti-democratic. These emotively fixed blinders have inhibited the emergence of a conceptual framework within which world developments in democracies and the rest of the world can be rationally assessed. The protests provoked by Jeane Kirkpatrick's attempt to show the superior merit of some non-democratic regimes over others in her now-famous Commentary article illustrates, among other things, the enduring power of the democratic faith. So, too, does the commitment of the Reagan administration, as shown in presidential speeches, to global democracy.
       
        In this essay I wish to carry this questioning further and argue that the inflation of rights, in the sense of hypertrophy of claims on society that the state is responsible for levying, is inherently self-defeating. It is bound to generate conflicts of rights that will end by threatening social stability and freedom.
       
        I owe the term 'conflict of rights' to Hegel, but I have extended its scope. Hegel noted and explored the contingency that rights could conflict. I argue that rights, as now defined, must. Ineluctably conflict and tear society apart.
       
        Contrary to what is now believed, democracy never enjoyed a good press in past times. Aristotle took it for granted that democracy degenerated into anarchy or some form of despotism. Until our own ... (2000 of 41825 Characters)
Read Full Article

Copyright © 2004 The World & I Online. All rights reserved. Terms of Use | Privacy Policy