Newsweek had a great opinion piece this week explaining why theocracy can not last. And that is what we are seeing in Iran. I would love to hear what you think. Here is the link to the article or at least the address.
http://www.newsweek.com/id/202861
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Of course it's true. Sooner or later theocracies fall; but sooner or later everything falls. With concern to safety and decency, we can only hope that this particular theocracy falls sooner rather than later.
ReplyDeleteInteresting Jefferson/religion fact of the day: Jefferson re-wrote that Holy Bible in such a way as to remove all of the miracles. He thought it was a more realistic depiction, but it never caught on.
It's an appealing idea--that freedom and democracy will ultimately win out--but at the same time, there are a few assumptions that bother me.
ReplyDeleteFirst, that democracy is inherently "good" and theocracy "bad". For that matter, is a theocracy inherently undemocratic (or vice-versa)? If you take democracy to be a government guided/mandated by its citizens (or at least, people representing those citizens), and a theocracy a government guided/mandated by a God (or at least, people representing that God), then yes, maybe they do look like opposites.
But that assumes that the values held by the citizens and the religious representatives are opposites. A democracy can be driven by religous values and still be a democracy--for that matter, many of of the values that drive our (U.S.) democracy came from religious beliefs.
So maybe the question I'm getting at is this: does a theocracy have to be totalitarian?
Where I'm going with this is that Meacham's point applies to totalitarian governments in general more than it applies to theocracies. With more and more easy access to the internet, Twitter, etc, (what Meacham calls a "free-ish flow of ideas, people and capital") it is becoming more and more difficult for a government to have complete control over its people's access to information and support (both within the country as well as around the rest of the world). Totalitarian governments are in trouble.
But I'm not convinced that theocracies are necessarily totalitarian.
Thoughts, anyone?
Dave, I never heard that story about Jefferson. However, it is consistent with his philosophy.
ReplyDeleteEmily, I agree with you that Meacham's argument works for totalitarian governments in general, rather than theocracies alone. But, I do believe that totaliatarian governments, of whatever kind, substitute their underlying philosophy for religion. For all that Lenin railed against religion, Marxism became a religion. Likewise, Maoism in China. And, whike I agree that theocracies do not have to be totalitarian, I think they have to be non-democratic. By its nature, theocracy can not reflect the general will of the people. It has to reperesent a higher authority which cannot be challenged. That is the essence of god. If the beliefs of the theocratic government are shared by the citizens, then I believe the society is not undemocratic, but it is still non-democratic because it does not feel the government exists to carry out the will of the people.
Thoughts, anyone?