Are Liberty And Democracy Good For Every Country Analysis

‘Are liberty and democracy good for every country’ showcased the pros and cons of democracy. Michael McFaul was a supporter of the idea that liberty and democracy is good for every country. While Robert D. Kaplan believed democracy would become irrelevant. The essay displayed the good and the bad qualities with views of McFaul and Kaplan. Even Though, Kaplan did presented many interesting facts and points in his argument. McFaul’s view on the destruction and construction phase in the process of democracy was very interesting and valid.

The essay explained and presented two different opinions on the question of are liberty and democracy good for every country. The two opposite views were from “The Liberty Doctrine” by Michael McFaul and “Was

Michael McFaul believed liberty and democracy were good for every country while, Robert Kaplan stated that liberty and democracy were not good for every country. One pro stated that American would be safer and benefit from every country being democratic. McFaul found that all of America’s enemies were anti-democratic countries. If anti-democratic countries and states were removed and replaced with democracy then, American’s policies and democracy would not be threated. However, a con for that topic was some countries function better with a hybrid of democracy and dictatorship. Kaplan found out countries like Singapore need the structure of a dictatorship to organized the country.

Another con would be democracy was not needed to have flourishing country. Kaplan used Singapore as an example of a country without a democracy and the country had a growing economy and a respectable relationship with its citizens. Also, another pro against this idea would be the corporations in Singapore had too much power. Their corporations took the place of a democracy and the corporations benefited the high class of the society. While, the middle and the low class struggled against the power of the