Search

This article on a challenge posed by the U.S. invasion of Iraq to the theory of democratic peace, as of March 2005. One problem with simplistically applying the political ideas of either Kant or the founders of the U.S. today is that they envisioned democracy in a very different world than we now have. Theirs was a world in which nation-states were comprised of citizens who were largely farmers, shopkeepers, artisans and merchants. In such a world, thousands of families in each nation stood on comparatively equal ground politically, socially and economically. When the U.S. was founded, each voter reflected one social unit and one economic unit. This is no longer the case. Today large social institutions with much greater power than individual citizens are the primary determinants of state policy. These groups include large corporations which control vast economic power and religious organizations and nongovernment organizations which wield great social impact. If the invasion of Iraq had been put to a referendum of the citizens of the U.S., approval for the invasion would not have been given and the prediction of Kant would have held in that case. This is not to say that the citizens might not have been talked into the invasion. The rhetoric of the Second Inaugural Address of U.S. President George W. Bush conforms more to the ideals of Kant and the founders of the U.S. than the actual organization of the U.S. or its behavior in the world. The philosophy of the U.S. must be understood in terms that take into account many social developments since the founding.