Friday, July 3, 2009

Last post on Honduras, really...

Larison today,

Does it really make any sense to say that the collective response of all of the country’s political institutions to remove Zelaya from power, which reflected an overwhelming majority consensus of the population, resulted in an attack on democracy?


Yes. Yes it does.

Arguing that because a president was unpopular in an opinion poll (remember Larison and the people peddling this meme are only citing a, as in one, single poll) that all of the instiutions of democracy may be suspended and a military coup justified is insanity. I don't know any other way to describe it. How anyone could argue that the entire democratic system of a nation would be justifiably short-circuited because of the popularity of a president is absolutely beyond me. This is an absurd and desperate argument.

Would Larison have supported a coup against George W. Bush and the abolition of our 1st, 4th and 14th Amendments after his removal? Bush's popularity was, statistically speaking, just as low as Zelaya. Applying the absurdist "logic" of Larison's position one could argue for a myriad of miliatry actions against duly elected leaders around the globe. What would that do for the spread of democracy, the protection of civil and human rights and geo-political stability?

A democratic society is built to outlast and withstand even the most incompetent or dangerous of leaders. It is the system itself that allows the democratic ideals and principles to survive and to thrive. Arguing that the systems and rules of law can be just discarded by judicial fiat and military coup is to argue against the very essence of what a democratic society is to stand for.

It's not all that different from the arguments that were pushed by Bush and Cheney to justify torture, wireless surveliance and the like in the aftermath of 9/11. They believed (or at least they argue) that democracy itself was threatened by Islamic terrorism and that to defend democracy they must subvert our traditions and instiutions of democracy. How is that any different than what the defenders of the coup are arguing today?

Like I said, it's insanity.

Relatedly, Sullivan has linked us to Dr. Greg Weeks take on the matter. He makes a handful of very succint points and is a bit of a subject matter expert, I highly recommend clicking through.

No comments: