According to Immanuel Kant’s democratic peace theory, world
peace is an achievable ideal provided that states follow a democratic
structure. Kant puts forward a host of arguments to support his stance
including some that are very difficult to imagine in today’s world.
The author considers negotiations as the preferred form of
handling conflicts for democracies since a democratic state recognizes the
futility of armed confrontation. He is also of the view that democracies would
operate in their purest forms, with divisions of power to mitigate the
likelihood of a few individuals controlling decision making. In fact in this
ideal world the citizens of the state have the power to influence decisions
regarding war and will seek to prevent it since they are opposed to the
needless bloodshed that the phenomenon brings about.
Before writing off
Kant’s work as far too idealistic to be applicable in the modern world, it
might be wise to remember that all theories are based on assumptions. The
reason Kant’s assumptions seem unrealistic is not due to the current structuring
of the world order, rather it is because his suppositions fail even in the
conditions of an ideal world. Perpetual peace would equal an everlasting sense
of contentment within human beings and while no realist analysis of human
nature as inherently selfish should be taken as binding, it still makes for a
far fetched assumption. The reality is that even if states recognize that war
is not in their best interests, there are elements within these states that
will invariably be keen on upsetting the status quo. Unfortunately democracy
cannot be used interchangeably with equality, especially considering that
the system works best in smaller
polities. How does a state with more than a billion citizens such as India
achieve equality?
Perhaps most importantly would states and their citizens be
willing to suffer if they lacked scarce resources such as water for example?
How could balance of power be achieved among democracies when the simple
geographical truth is that resources are not equally distributed and
apportioned among states? The answers to such questions regrettably cannot be
found in the Democratic Peace theory.
Good post and I like that you distinguished democracy from equality. Furthermore, you're also right to point out that democracy works best in small polities. How is democracy a global panacea if it only works in small, relatively homogeneous countries and does not necessarily lead to equality?
ReplyDelete