Democracy, violence and the White House

Re “The myth that shapes Bush’s world,” Current, Jan. 15

I can only conclude that Mark Helprin advocates leaving people in the shackles of tyranny if it is beneficial to our country. From the huge voter turnout in Iraq, it is obvious that some form of democracy is what the majority there want. Unfortunately, right now it is not entirely clear if this will lead to good or bad things for our country. But morally the correct thing to do is to lend them a hand.

The United States should not be in the business of perpetuating despotism (as it has done in the past).

STEVE STILLMAN

Redondo Beach

*

Helprin’s enumeration of various democracies throughout history with tendencies toward violence is a crystal-clear denunciation and condemnation of President Bush’s main pretext for interfering in the affairs of other nations -- that “democracies are peaceful countries.”

But, alas, Bush has little understanding of, let alone appreciation for, the lessons of history. In his simplistic way of thinking, all that counts is that he’s got God on his side.

ROBERT C. LUTES

Temple City

*

Helprin correctly states that democracies are not perfect and not necessarily peaceful. However, he is mistaken in his belief that U.S. foreign policy now rests on this wrong assumption.

If our administration wanted to promote democracies in the world, we would be attacking China, Pakistan or a host of African countries.

Our main reason for invading Iraq was to assure control of its oil reserves. When our initial excuse of weapons of mass destruction was proved false, we fell back on the rationale of promoting democracy in the Middle East.

Our administration continues to balance power between countries; that is why it is building India as a counterweight to China’s growing military and economic power.

MANECK BHUJWALA

Huntington Beach