Democracy is also the only way to effectively stop armed revolutions. From Ron Paul to Che, the entire spectrum says "no" to armed resistance until all democratic means are exhausted.
>Democracy is also the only way to effectively stop armed revolutions.
You phrase that as a positive, but it could also be phrased as a negative: Democracy allows evil people to rise to power without having to fight anyone to do it. Hitler was elected democratically.
True, but I'm sure that using violence to gain the trust of the voters was substantially easier and less costly than using it to overthrow the German government would have been.
Che? He was a genocidal psychopath that hated gays and people that were religious. He personally oversaw the execution - murder - of thousands of innocent people that he regarded as undesirable or conflicting with his beliefs. Bloodthirsty, is the description he gave himself. He didn't start with democratic means, he started with sheer extreme violence.
Che is one of the greatest villains of the last century.
Maybe this is satire, but this is utterly disgusting.
but it can be made to work
No it can't! The Soviet Union, Cuba, North Korea, and Nazi Germany have proven that! How many more millions do you want to kill before you're convinced?
Cuba may or may not be as bad as you claim--go look at their life expectancies and number of doctors.
The Soviet Union really seemed to run into issues when they'd integrated enough other nations to create a non-unified block; today Russia has the same issues with Chechnya. So, that underlines my point: uniform culture promotes strength.
North Korea is a shitshow, but that has little to do with unification and more to do with abominable management.
Nazi Germany... well, that's an interesting datapoint, right? Their government was most effective and popular support greatest when dissenting factions had been integrated. Germany is doing quite well nowadays, whereas when you look at the broader amalgamation of the EU you see strife and disagreement.
From the standpoint of government, and democracy, it is a lot easier to govern/be governed by a homogeneous group than it is to handle dissenting views in an acceptable fashion.
The fact that the US has done as well as it has--or the UK for that matter--without devolving to purges is quite impressive.
