The difference between "the West and the rest" is captured in this idea of the corporate person -- an idea that has its origin in the Roman law and no real equivalent in the fiqh. The personal state is characterized by a constitution, by a rule of law, and by a rotation of office-holders. Its decisions are collectively arrived at by a process that may not be wholly democratic, but which nevertheless includes every citizen and provides the means whereby each citizen can adopt the outcome as his own.
Och lite längre fram:
In the absence of corporate personality, experiment in democratic government lead to social disruption, factionalism, and either the tyranny of the majority or the seizure of power by a clique. This we have witnessed time and time again in Africa, and those who believe that the remedy for the "failed states" of the region is to introduce democratic elections fail to see that without the framework of institutions and the underlying territorial loyalty, democratization is merely a staging post on the way to tyranny.
Snacket hos oss efter t ex arabvärldens revolutioner är väl att vi inte ska lägga oss i vilka (underförstått demokratiska) institutioner som de väljer att skapa. Naivt?
Ämnesrelaterat i media: SvD DN
Andra bloggar om: samhälle, demokrati, arabvärlden, Afrika