Democracy: Government by a Majority of Sinners Can't Go Wrong!

It seems that in my recent travels online, an increasing number of people are asking the question "What do we do with Iraq?"  Opinions vary from "pull out," to "stay the course," to "NUKE 'EM ALL," but I find that there is little dialogue on exactly what the Christian view on the war would be.  How should a Christian view the spread of Democracy, and just how good should we consider it to be?  I cannot give a definitive answer, but I can provide you with the conclusion I have come to at this point, regarding the Christian view of the War in Iraq and the building of democracy.

We are currently in a war against a certain ideology which is opposed to the concept of liberty as we know it in the West. Islamic Fundamentalism seeks peace through forced submission, and such a totalitarian goal is quite opposed to personal liberty. You see, the religion's purpose is to enforce adherence to a particular moral code which man by nature cannot adhere to, and because of this inability of man, Islam needs the help of the government to achieve its goals. If man can't be good on his own, then the government must force him to be good.

Now, this belief lies at the heart of Islam, and in the hearts of even the least educated of Iraqi Muslims. People must be forced to be good, they believe, and a government which forces goodness is the best kind of government. Now, here we come with our tanks and guns, proclaiming that we wish to bring freedom to all Iraqis, and we receive a strange welcome.

Some Iraqis threw flowers at us. Many had lived in fear of Saddam (who was hardly a devout Muslim, and more of a psychopath), and we had freed them. Yay for us, yay for them.

But then, some Iraqis threw bombs at us. We were puzzled... We freed them, so why on earth would they attack us? Rather than figuring out why they were fighting the freedom we brought, we took the typical American strategy of labeling anyone opposed to our cause as an "enemy of freedom," and fighting back. These terrorists are obviously beyond hope anyway, so it's fine to be killing them, right?

I dunno. But it is clear that our emphasis on bringing Democracy is what caused them to attack us in Iraq (because as I have stated, Islam is diametrically opposed to the Western and Judeo-Christian concepts of Liberty).

Now, let me say a little bit about Democracy. Democracy is the self-government of a population, usually through the election of representatives who will vote to make laws which are agreeable to all or most of their constituents. Democracy is a hard sort of government to have, though; you see, a totalitarian government is quite simple for the people living under it, for they need not worry about making laws, much less laws that are just. All they need to do is obey. But a Democracy is difficult to run, because it requires that all of its citizens have an understanding not only of how the Democracy runs, but also of the concept of Liberty; that is, the autonomy that a Democracy allows for, and the proper use of it.

Now, true Liberty is in fact a Christian concept. Perhaps you would cry out and say "Oh, but most of our Founding Fathers were Deists," and I would say you are absolutely correct. However, there can never be any true and lasting Liberty in any culture other than a Christian one, for only Christianity can provide true freedom in a Democracy when followed out to its logical end. This is because every other religious belief system emphasizes adherence to Rules, and while governmental enforcement of these rules is not a requirement in every religion, every religion's rules regarding interaction with other people would necessitate that those people be brought to adherence of that religion for their own good, and what better environment to do that in than a Democracy?

So any democracy will tend to reflect and enforce the religious beliefs of its people; it should not, for an ideal democracy would be secular, but it will. Given this fact, it is worth noting how well the American government stays out of religious affairs. It isn't perfect, but it's better than most, and believe it or not, this is a direct result of Christianity.

You see, I've already said that a compassionate person from any other religion would seek to enforce their religion by means of the government for the good of the people. However, true Christianity is not like that. Christianity is not obsessed with what people do, despite what American Evangelicals might have led you to believe; rather Christianity cares about the heart of man, which no government can touch. Thus Christianity has no real stake in government; it can do no good there, for the government only controls man's actions, and man's actions do not affect his heart.

This is why only a Christian culture can yield a long-standing and free democracy; only a Christian culture will keep the government secular. Even atheistic/agnostic secularists must find and enforce rules, and while they most certainly tend to believe in individual autonomy, more than that is needed to direct a government, and more than that cannot be agreed on because of the very nature of atheism/agnosticism. Therefore, with no universal set of standards for where individual liberty begins or ends, the government will eventually begin to enforce some philosophy's moral code (which is the thing that a secular government will refuse to enforce, regardless of the philosophy's stance on the existence or nature of a Supreme Being). 

So it can be said that Democracy requires and understanding of Liberty, and that Liberty cannot be sown without Christianity. Now, let me go back to what I said earlier... We (myself included) thought it was a great idea to roll our tanks into Iraq and build a Democracy in the midst of the Islamic World, which understands neither liberty nor Christianity. Does it sound like such a great idea now?

I ask you, what is the best that can happen in Iraq? That they finally get a nice democracy to reflect the will of the people? Perhaps you have forgotten that the will of the people is to be ruled, to be protected from themselves. They will have at best, a democratically-elected totalitarian government, and will still be as devoid of liberty (and as unsaved) as they were under Saddam.

And that is the best case scenario; I will say nothing of the impending of civil war which is even now brewing as different groups fight to have their particular view of Islam and morality enforced upon the masses.  In the end, this conflict will result in an illiberal totalitarian government as well. No matter what happens, we will have fought for nothing.

You see, we went about this whole fiasco in the wrong order (though six months ago I would have never imagined that). We tried to build a Democracy without letting Christ teach Liberty to the land. Instead, in typical American fashion, we took something we think of as good and created a whole ideology and a war because of it, only trying to fit Christ into our little house of cards as an after-thought.

I have heard it said that we must have a democracy and Christian-friendly government in Iraq in order to send missionaries and see conversions. Don't you see that can't be right?  Besides the obvious impossibility of a Christian-friendly government in a non-Christian illiberal democracy, The church has never thrived more than when under persecution. You wanna know why the simple testimony of the death of any one of the martyrs has yielded more souls for the Kingdom than you have in your entire life? It's because the martyrs were more concerned with bringing others to the knowledge that there is a God worth worshiping, and not with creating a government that is "Jesus-friendly." For the government has no hold over the hearts of the people, and whether it is friendly or not is completely irrelevant as to whether or not we should be preaching the Gospel.

If you do not read or understand any other part of this post, read this, for I shall summarize it: Christ can be the only foundation for true Liberty, and Liberty can be the only foundation for Democracy. In Iraq, we are seeking to sow Democracy before Liberty, and Liberty before Christianity, when it is painfully obvious that neither Democracy nor Liberty can grow in an Islamic culture. The only thing that can take root in such a culture is Christ, and Christ is the only thing that can make Liberty grow and Democracy work. Now we are in a war that cannot be won, so a careful but swift pullout (to minimize bloodshed) is the only option we have if we ever wish to see Christianity, Liberty and Democracy take root in the Middle East.

Comments

[Emily]

Awesome post! Very thought provoking. I am jealous of your mad writing skillz.

Nice hat, btw.

[Paradoxically Correct]

http://www.gisburne.com/

Tag'd, Jake. Read thee and maybe you'll find something to write about.

Peace.

[Miserable Old Fool]

Truth is, Ryan Cox makes a good point in Facebook comment. The case could be made that the freedom our troops are fighting for is our freedom to live in a country that has all the benefits of relatively cheap oil. That is not neccesarily a bad thing, if you think it through. If you stand by your contention that our govenrment should be purely secular, with only the interest of our populace as a driving interest, then it would indeed be proper to not only be in Iraq, but to actually go in with overwhelming brute force, subjugate them all (humane living conditions, of course), and then keep them fed and doctored while they pump our oil for us. The net savings on the oil could be used to finance the whole project.
Lest this should sound provincial, do not forget that much of the Western world is dependant, as are we, on relatively cheap oil to maintain the economic status quo. With this in mind, such a plan could even be seen as somewhat alruistic.

Just another perspective.

[The Wanderer]

If Christianity has no real stake in the government, from where does the government pull its morality? The government enforces rules. What rules should it be enforcing? With tolerance now so idealized, I would be hard pressed to think of any rule that everyone would agree on. It's like what you said - a democracy will reflect the common beliefs of the people.

While enforcing rules may not bring about a change of heart in people, it can make the world a little safer. Except infusing Christian values into any North American government would meet with such opposition that it would become somewhat totalitarian. Hmm. So much for democracy. And yet if that's not done, then we'll continue to see values disappear and the continent go to pot.

Shoot. We're hosed either way. Guess the government can't do much, here. Evangelists needed! (No, not those 'life-enhancement' preachers, or those 'be good and you'll make it' proselytizers, but those good, old fashioned 'here's the gospel, and this is what it means' people) This place needs a revival.

[Ubersehen]

Curious. I wonder if I could ask for clarification on a few points from the various folks who've contributed to this discussion so far.

-Jacob-

Even atheistic/agnostic secularists must find and enforce rules, and while they most certainly tend to believe in individual autonomy, more than that is needed to direct a government, and more than that cannot be agreed on because of the very nature of atheism/agnosticism.

What, according to you, is the nature of atheism/agnosticism, and, further, how does it prevent them from directing a government?

it is worth noting how well the American government stays out of religious affairs. It isn't perfect, but it's better than most, and believe it or not, this is a direct result of Christianity.

Which governments would you say stay out of religious affairs better than the American government? How does this affect their societies, in your esteem?

Now, true Liberty is in fact a Christian concept.

From wordnet.princeton.edu:
Liberty - autonomy: immunity from arbitrary exercise of authority: political independence.

In what way is Christianity the originator of this idea?

-Miserable Old Fool-

If you stand by your contention that our govenrment should be purely secular, with only the interest of our populace as a driving interest, then it would indeed be proper to not only be in Iraq, but to actually go in with overwhelming brute force, subjugate them all (humane living conditions, of course), and then keep them fed and doctored while they pump our oil for us.

What is it about a secular government that you believe would lead to this kind of inhumane behaviour?