It is interesting that many in the West seem to think there is only one form of democracy, i.e. theirs, when there exists very important differences in democratic systems between (say) USA and Sweden, France and UK, Ireland and Scotland, for example.
When we ask, for instance, when China is going to be democratic, what we seem to mean to say always is: "When is China going to copy the West?" But China does not want to copy the West; they want to evolve a system, including a democratic system, that can work in China.
Another example of our arrogance, in my opinion, is with respect to the system in Cuba. We say there is no democracy in Cuba, but in fact there is democracy in Cuba, it's just not the same as ours. And if democracy is the be all and end all of everything for us then why are we not shouting about the absence of democracy in Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al?
It is interesting that many in the West seem to think there is only one form of democracy, i.e. theirs, when there exists very important differences in democratic systems between (say) USA and Sweden, France and UK, Ireland and Scotland, for example.
When we ask, for instance, when China is going to be democratic, what we seem to mean to say always is: "When is China going to copy the West?" But China does not want to copy the West; they want to evolve a system, including a democratic system, that can work in China.
Another example of our arrogance, in my opinion, is with respect to the system in Cuba. We say there is no democracy in Cuba, but in fact there is democracy in Cuba, it's just not the same as ours. And if democracy is the be all and end all of everything for us then why are we not shouting about the absence of democracy in Saudi Arabia, Egypt et al?