What's more important: democracy, or liberalism/secularism?

[Blue3]

A big discussion in the Turkey Coup thread right now.



 What's better?

 1. a democratically-elected government... even if it morphs into a populist elected-dictatorship that increasingly tries to consolidate power, oppresses free speech and the media and ethnic/religious minorities, treats women differently, and demolishes the separation of religion/government by making government lean more theocratic

 or

 2. a government that's secular and maintains a separation of religion/government, treats people equally regardless of ethnicity/religion/gender and other minority protections against mob-rule, doesn't imprison journalists or critics/protesters, protects other civil rights/liberties... even if it's an unelected organization (like the military) that takes control by force and may or may not reinstate a democratic government eventually




 *note: "liberalism " here doesn't mean Democrats or progressives or socialism or anything like that, it means the things I listed above

*note 2: "secularism" means separation of religion and state, the freedom of an individual to practice any religion or not practice any at all with the government remaining neutral and protect the freedom of religion

[Beet]

A big discussion in the Turkey Coup thread right now.



 What's better?

 1. a democratically-elected government... even if it morphs into a populist elected-dictatorship that increasingly tries to consolidate power, oppresses free speech and the media and ethnic/religious minorities, treats women differently, and demolishes the separation of religion/government by making government lean more theocratic

That's not democracy. No one's saying Erdogan is particularly democratic. But starting an event which is pretty much guaranteed to result in deaths of innocent people and risks tipping your country into a civil war is the act of a murderer, and pretty stupid to boot.

[Santander]

Liberalism > Democracy > Secularism (at least, the Kemalist version of secularism)

[Blue3]

A big discussion in the Turkey Coup thread right now.



 What's better?

 1. a democratically-elected government... even if it morphs into a populist elected-dictatorship that increasingly tries to consolidate power, oppresses free speech and the media and ethnic/religious minorities, treats women differently, and demolishes the separation of religion/government by making government lean more theocratic

That's not democracy. No one's saying Erdogan is particularly democratic. But starting an event which is pretty much guaranteed to result in deaths of innocent people and risks tipping your country into a civil war is the act of a murderer, and pretty stupid to boot.

That's illiberal democracy. Still democracy.

[Illiniwek]

Turkey and Russia elect their authoritarian governments, but those elections are a sham anyway. Trust me you're not going to see an "election" anytime soon where the opposition wins.

I'll gladly take the Option 2 secular*/liberal* military dictatorship

[Vosem]

Definitely the second. Democracy that is nothing but the abusive force of the majority of the nation deserves to be put down with force.

[Derpist]

Democracy. Any alternative inevitably morphs into an abusive, incompetent oligarchy.

[The Mikado]

The Turkish military may be secular, but it sure as hell isn't liberal by any functional definition, as the periods of time in which Turkey was under military rule in living memory can demonstrate. Kemalism is actually a pretty scary doctrine.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Democracy, but democracy cannot exist without a minimum degree of liberalism.

[RI]

Neither are that important but democratic governance is less so.

[Kingpoleon]

True democracy>Non-political liberalism

[SillyAmerican]

A big discussion in the Turkey Coup thread right now.

 What's better?

 1. a democratically-elected government... even if it morphs into a populist elected-dictatorship that increasingly tries to consolidate power, oppresses free speech and the media and ethnic/religious minorities, treats women differently, and demolishes the separation of religion/government by making government lean more theocratic

That's not democracy. No one's saying Erdogan is particularly democratic. But starting an event which is pretty much guaranteed to result in deaths of innocent people and risks tipping your country into a civil war is the act of a murderer, and pretty stupid to boot.

What is fascinating about the Turkish situation is that apparently the Turkish Constitution places the responsibility of maintaining a secular democratic government in the hands of the military. Perhaps the real question is whether or not maintaining the Constitution takes precedence over a democratic vote.

John Bolton summarized things as follows:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The second is hypothetically  better, but does not exist in the real world, outside the minds of the Thai middle-class and bone-headed Western observers of Turkey.


Also I'd pick the AKP over the military anyday. Hilarious how.many people cum over the Turkish military because they don't understand what Turks mean when they say 'secular'.

[ObserverIE]

The second is hypothetically  better, but does not exist in the real world, outside the minds of the Thai middle-class and bone-headed Western observers of Turkey.


Also I'd pick the AKP over the military anyday. Hilarious how.many people cum over the Turkish military because they don't understand what Turks mean when they say 'secular'.

Does it even exist in the minds of the Thai middle-class other than as a cover story for preserving privilege?

[Swedish Rainbow Capitalist Cheese]

Democracy, but democracy cannot exist without a minimum degree of liberalism.

This.

EDIT: I'd add that democracy is one of the core liberal values so it also hard to see it work the other way around.  It cannot really be a liberal state if it doesn't embrace some form of at least minimal democracy.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Liberalism > Democracy > Secularism (at least, the Kemalist version of secularism)

This - though I'd say some secularism, or more accurately - religious neutrality, falls within the liberalism category.

[MASHED POTATOES. VOTE!]

Democracy, but democracy cannot exist without a minimum degree of liberalism.

And some Democratically elected leaders can forfeit their democratic legitimacy by restoring to authoritative means.

[Bismarck]

Liberalism (in the broader sense). The majority can be just as tyrannical as a dictator. However, in practice you can't really have one without the other. Democracy is critical to liberalism.

[🦀🎂🦀🎂]

The second is hypothetically  better, but does not exist in the real world, outside the minds of the Thai middle-class and bone-headed Western observers of Turkey.


Also I'd pick the AKP over the military anyday. Hilarious how.many people cum over the Turkish military because they don't understand what Turks mean when they say 'secular'.

Does it even exist in the minds of the Thai middle-class other than as a cover story for preserving privilege?

They've probably convinced themselves that supporting the Ywllows is the right and proper thing to do.

[Hnv1]

In an abstract manner: liberalism, democracy has no value in itself.

[Hatman 🍁]

Well, first of all, Turkey has neither...

[Green Line]

Democracy is just a vehicle for Liberalism.

[evergreenarbor]

Democracy, but democracy cannot exist without a minimum degree of liberalism.

[Simfan34]

[Simfan34]

The second is hypothetically  better, but does not exist in the real world, outside the minds of the Thai middle-class and bone-headed Western observers of Turkey.


Also I'd pick the AKP over the military anyday. Hilarious how.many people cum over the Turkish military because they don't understand what Turks mean when they say 'secular'.

Does it even exist in the minds of the Thai middle-class other than as a cover story for preserving privilege?

You know, I once wrote a paper on this exact topic...