Democracy is dangerous stuff. We like to think that it’s all free expression, fair elections, bunnies and rainbows, but democratic structures are a powerful tool for oppression. Why did Saddam Hussein hold “elections” in Iraq? By creating the facade of democracy, the Iraqi leader undercut some of his opposition’s complaints, and so stabilized his regime. But he was behind the times: While Hussein used aggression to crush his political enemies, leaders in Cambodia, Singapore, Thailand and other nations had discovered that courts, elections and other democratic institutions can be just as vicious.
Leaders in these countries have weaponized democracy in a system that maintains their absolute power: The sue-ocracy. It avoids the chief problem with traditional authoritarian governments: That the atmosphere of violence rulers create could spark a backlash from the people. With the sue-ocracy, violence becomes unnecessary. Instead of shooting and razing, leaders can sue and arraign.
Take Cambodia. In the 1970s, the Khmer Rouge committed genocide, slaughtering its opposition to hold on to control over the nation. But it didn’t last. The regime fell after four years when Vietnam invaded.
By contrast, the current leader, Hun Sen, has been at or near the upper echelon of power in Cambodia for 20 years. Hun Sen has used his share of violence, but nothing he has done could compare to the Khmer Rouge. Recently, in an effort to further consolidate his power, Hun Sen is not trying to kill the opposition, but to sue it for criminal defamation. He is wielding the court system, instead of a tank, as an instrument of political force.
It’s been done before. Thailand’s Prime Minister, Thaksin Shinawatra, has taken prominent media figures to court to keep them from, you guessed it, “defaming him.” In Singapore, too, the ruling party routinely pursues its critics on defamation charges.
Defamation charges are the AK-47 of the 21st Century, the weapon of choice for leaders who seek to tighten their control. Largely because of Western powers, the sue-ocracy is becoming a leading form of government in developing nations. The West bounced from country to country establishing elections, courts and parliaments. But there can be elections without fairness. There can be courts without due process. There can be parliaments without representation. There can be structure without spirit.
We can’t force democracy; we can only inspire it. Until a nation’s people recognize their free will to act and demand a government that protects it, they will only have the hollow outline of democracy. My fear is that the oppression of quiet, “legal” action will be much harder to overcome than that of open violence. Open violence catalyzes revolution in a way that the sinister mediocrity of suing one’s opponents cannot. But once it becomes entrenched in the system, it may become difficult to extract.
And that, my friends, is how even democracy can be evil.
Prajwal Ciryam is a Weinberg senior. He can
be reached at [email protected].
