Yay democracy! Most wars aren’t about democracy though. I mean Vietnam was about stopping the tide of communist expansion, but that was more about preventing another country from aligning with the Soviets and China than about the expansion of democracy. For decades the west was fine with supporting illiberal nations as along as they were against the communists (and then against Islamic extremism).
It’s really a two step process, step one make sure nation isn’t actively fighting us or our allies (I don’t care about which side of the political spectrum you are if your shooting at me). Once war stops then you talk about democratization. War for democracy feels like a misnomer, unless you’re in a world war and whole nations are being swallowed up and governments toppled. I think the struggle is that democracy comes from the people, and as such it’s hard to have a democracy imposed by a foreign power if the people don’t push for it or acquiesce in some way( an example of this would be post-war Japan, in light of atomic bombs and occupation, Japanese leadership wasn’t in much position to quibble about become a more democratic nation).
Differentiating between a war for democracy and a war against aggression can be difficult, but it would seem that Putins states aims are squarely anti-democratic and should be seen as such.
It's worth trying. Since there are different forms of liberal democracy, it isn't even a one-size-fits-all problem. On another note (since Ukraine is so prominent in at least some of the thinking behind this article), here is a link: https://meduza.io/en/feature/2022/03/05/i-ll-be-depressed-and-i-ll-cut-costs?utm_source=email&utm_medium=briefly&utm_campaign=2022-03-08. If you scroll down you can sign up for it.
Yay democracy! Most wars aren’t about democracy though. I mean Vietnam was about stopping the tide of communist expansion, but that was more about preventing another country from aligning with the Soviets and China than about the expansion of democracy. For decades the west was fine with supporting illiberal nations as along as they were against the communists (and then against Islamic extremism).
It’s really a two step process, step one make sure nation isn’t actively fighting us or our allies (I don’t care about which side of the political spectrum you are if your shooting at me). Once war stops then you talk about democratization. War for democracy feels like a misnomer, unless you’re in a world war and whole nations are being swallowed up and governments toppled. I think the struggle is that democracy comes from the people, and as such it’s hard to have a democracy imposed by a foreign power if the people don’t push for it or acquiesce in some way( an example of this would be post-war Japan, in light of atomic bombs and occupation, Japanese leadership wasn’t in much position to quibble about become a more democratic nation).
Differentiating between a war for democracy and a war against aggression can be difficult, but it would seem that Putins states aims are squarely anti-democratic and should be seen as such.