57 years and the media says the same damn thing

[HolyWarrior]

I came across a verrrry interesting article from the January 1946 Life Magazine
Part One and
Part Two which was protesting our treatment of Europe after WWII, claiming the people were now worse off, hated us, yada yada.

sounds like the same damn things the media's been spouting off about the situation in Iraq, eh? Some things never change... [img]graemlins/awcrap.gif[/img]

[ 10-21-2003, 01:02 PM: Message edited by: HolyWarrior ]

[B_part]

Imposed democracies can work. Take Italy, Germany and Japan. Among them Japan is the most stunning case: non western culture, militaristic, with the cult of a god-emperor. Yet now they are a democracy.

What people tend to forget is that such results have a cost in blood: in WWII it was paid before the occupation, because the enemy had been utterly defeated before setting foot on his soil. In Iraq the enemy has fled and hid, and is not yet defeated - Saddam and Al Quaeda are still there. The price in blood has to be paid during the occupation to stabilize the region. But I think in the end a democracy will be estabilished. At least I hope so.

[Faceman]

Originally posted by B_part: Imposed democracies can work. Take Italy, Germany and Japan. Among them Japan is the most stunning case: non western culture, militaristic, with the cult of a god-emperor. Yet now they are a democracy.

Germany: had a democracy before 1933
Italy: was a parlamentaric kingdom (like the UK)
So democracy was REinstated there
Japan IMHO is a stunning case of it NOT working because it is de facto still a fascistic state though a democracy on the outside

[Thoran]

Can't say that I can find more fascist traits in Japan than I can find in the US or other western democratic countries. Sure government and industry are in bed, they've got some corruption issues and they try to keep a tight reign on their economy... but they don't seem to have some of the more onerous traits of fascism. They don't have government instituted censorship, no use of terror to control the populace, no centralization of power under a dictator, and no overemphasis on military might and projection of power. While japanese are often described as racist... racism is not a matter of government policy (I think it's more a result of a homogeneous society).

Germany was a republic... but a young one, only existing since 1919. They barely had what... 15 years before Hitler siezed power? The Weimar republic seems like a failed first attempt at establishing a democratic form of government in Germany.

[Azred]

The real problem is that so many people want results right now, and that is simply not going to happen. Even in the best circumstances it will take a new government at least 10 years to truly stabilize itself after several decades of being mishandled.
I was in the Czech Republic back in 1993-4, barely 3 years after the Velvet Revolution, and the people on the street were bitterly divided over who should be in charge, what direction the government and country should head, when was the economy going to improve, or even whether they had been better off under the Communists or not. Were I to go back today the situation would be vastly improved, but they have had 12 years to work out the initial problems.
Iraq, having the additional hurdles of no common background with Western countries or democratic government, is going to take even longer.

[Grojlach]

Originally posted by HolyWarrior: I came across a verrrry interesting article from the January 1946 Life Magazine Part One and Part Two which was protesting our treatment of Europe after WWII, claiming the people were now worse off, hated us, yada yada. sounds like the same damn things the media's been spouting off about the situation in Iraq, eh? Some things never change... [img]graemlins/awcrap.gif[/img]

Yes, because obviously a hostile occupation by another country is comparable to kicking out a dictator from his own country who still had a lot of supporters among his people.
Not only that, but the articles were attempts at writing critical analyses of the chaotic post-war-period in Europe and genuine news reports when the entire continent was in ruins and many things still had to be rebuilt... Would you blame him for the negative portrayal? The fact that everything turned out for the better in later years is irrelevant for your insinuations and impossible to know at that moment - the articles were products of their time, as are the current reports from Iraq. You simply can't draw comparisons between the past and the present and draw conclusions regarding the future from them (or whatever you were trying to insinuate), as the situations are entirely different, the perspective and attitude of the liberated population isn't quite the same and global skepsis and disagreement from before the moment of American intervention in the two seperate wars is literally worlds apart. And I doubt the Americans had to deal with that much opposition in the post-WWII-period in the shape of terrorist attacks either, like is the case now in Iraq - when the Germans were defeated, they and their supporters were gone or had gone into hiding or shamed silence, while Saddam's supporters are still operating from within the country and literally regarding the American intervention as a "hostile occupation"...
You don't have to agree with their take on the last bit, but I only mention it to illustrate that while the liberated European populace in post-1945 may have been divided over the role of the Americans, it's nothing like the current bitter, extreme and most importantly violent division of sentiments regarding the American and British troops in Iraq - the attitude of the population is wholly different, and naturally that's reflecting on the Iraqi media reports; and only adding to the skepsis of the current role of the Americans in Iraq and the reports of doom and gloom, which you may find offensive and not reconciling with the image of cheering and flag-waving American infallibility.

Either way, this comparison of yours is about as relevant as all of the Bush=Hitler-comparisons that are going around. A few historical parallels doesn't automatically mean that history will repeat itself.

[ 10-22-2003, 04:39 AM: Message edited by: Grojlach ]

[Faceman]

I partly agree with Grojlach.
While drawing comparisons between now and the past is part of what history is all about, these ARE completely different situations.
Europe and the US have a common cultural background, democracy (though problematic) was at work there before and because the people wanted it. People though wary of occupying troops were glad about the end of a 7-year war and eager to reinstate their democracies. Nazis were in hiding and widely unsupported by the population. And the allied forces though occupants were not seperated from the population like it's nowadays in Iraq, as they all were of the same Christian, Western Philosophical, European background.

[Grojlach]

Originally posted by Faceman: I partly agree with Grojlach. While drawing comparisons between now and the past is part of what history is all about, these ARE completely different situations.

We are probably more in agreement than you may think - while I may have stated that you can't draw comparisons between the past and the present to make predictions about the future without checking the context in which the events took place, I do agree with you that lessons should be learned from the past.
I just don't think that's relevant right here, I don't think that HolyWarrior's insinuated "lesson" is anything but an excuse to ignore any media criticism at the adress of the American troops in Iraq without actually responding to that criticism in a substantial manner.

[B_part]

Originally posted by Faceman: quote: Originally posted by B_part: Imposed democracies can work. Take Italy, Germany and Japan. Among them Japan is the most stunning case: non western culture, militaristic, with the cult of a god-emperor. Yet now they are a democracy.

Germany: had a democracy before 1933
Italy: was a parlamentaric kingdom (like the UK)
So democracy was REinstated there
Japan IMHO is a stunning case of it NOT working because it is de facto still a fascistic state though a democracy on the outside [/QUOTE]Italy was more or less democratic, alright. But Weimar Republic was as fragile as thin ice - Germans voted Hitler knowing he would change things towards a dictatorship - authority was felt as a need to counter economical and social problems. Anyway, in 1945, you could not expect the Germans to love the americans who had killed million of their fathers, sons and brothers - Allied forces were indeed occupying forces which imposed their form of government. Maybe something was already there, but Germans didn't decide on thei free will.

As to Japan, looking like a democracy is really all what it takes to be a democracy in facts: people vote, can express their opinions freely have clearly stated rights and so on. The subtle distinctions are best left to philosophers. In real world a fac-simile democracy is really enough. And alos, after years of feigning democracy, a country will become effectively democratic - young people tend to change things and rebel to traditions.


With all this, I am not trying to institute a comparison between Iraq and Japan or Germany. I am simply saying that things can indeed change despite the odds. Just you cannot expect them to change overnight and without a cost. What will happen in Iraq will depend on how much Iraqi people will benefit from democracy with regard to their life quality.

[Faceman]

While the allies were indeed occupants in post-WWII Germany, the Germans shared the same cultural background with them (especially with the English and French) which made it a lot easier for them than it is for the Iraqis now.
Of course they were "the enemy" just months before, but they wore the same clothes, listened to similar music, read similar books and had the same historical background. They still were neighbours not some unknown force from the other side of the planet like e.g. the Persians were for the ancient Greeks or the Turks were for medieval Europe.