Stop the spread of Democracy?

There has been a pretty startling amount of democracy insemination in the world lately. What with Condoleeza Rice's missions to Asia, the invasion of two middle-eastern countries, and an overall sense of "Free Man's Burden" in the news (http://www.nytimes.com/2005/10/12/technology/12filter.html).

Is this expected from a country with a ripened Constitution and a head of pride, or is there a little more than meets the eye to all our worry? Is it the zest of freedom that's leading the country to this, or is it financial gain that's leading the government?

>>6

That is precisely why I never said that in a democracy everyone is free all the time; my point was exclusively that in a non-democracy you ever never free, because you never get your choice, because you never get the opportunity to opine for your choice.

On the other topic you bring up though, I would say that by a happy coincidence, most people are members of the majority. :P

But all silliness aside, it's elementary logic. not-democracy = ~freedom. The opposite of ~X is "there is at least one X", not "everything is X". That's all I meant to say... democracy is the formal opposite of 0 freedom (aka, freedom for some).

Freedom for everybody all the time? Anarchy is still democratic... its just a democracy of one.