and remember, as Fareed said on Rose's show tonight, the European tradition ranges over a 2,000 year period including the Renaissance, the Reformation, and the Enlightenment. That's why the Eastern European countries installed solid liberal democracies so quickly after (only) 40 years of Communism.
Interesting point. But "democracy", however it is defined, has an odd history in that period. If you include the Greek city states, seems to me you would argue it comes and gos depend on certain conditions. If you don't include them, on the grounds of severely restricted franchise, then where would one place the first incarnation? Sometimes it's put at Runnymede in 1215, Magna Carta and all that stuff. But talk about restricted franchise. That would better be put as placing limits on the king's power than the advent of democracy.
So where would he put it? He might argue that that concept of individualism hangs around such that the individual comes to think of her/his self as separate from society. I think that's often thought of as either the Renaissance or the Enlightenment. Not 2,000 years. Protestant theologians place it with the Reformation and the claim that individuals could interpret scripture without recourse to church authority.
So where would he put it?
Incidentally, today's New York Times Book Review has an interesting review of Zakaria's book by Niall Ferguson. Worth reading.
'The Future of Freedom': Overdoing Democracy
By NIALL FERGUSON
nytimes.com |
