|
Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
|
First published on March 4, 2008, doi:10.1177/0002764208316227
American Behavioral Scientist 2008;51:1339.
A more recent version of this article appeared on May 1, 2008
Security, Muscularity and Morality: Three Comments on Etzioni
John Mueller*
Mershon Center (check with author)
* To whom correspondence should be addressed. E-mail: bbbb{at}osu.edu.
 |
Abstract |
|---|
Democracy has become increasingly accepted over the last two centuries, but the process has mostly been one of persuasion, fashion leadership, and luck, not forceful evangelism. Although democracy can sometimes be established by force, this has generally not worked well when favorable conditions are absent. Intervention for the purpose of restoring basic security where it is severely threatened or under attack is unlikely to happen much, held back by a lack of interest, an extremely low tolerance for casualties, and an increasing aversion to long-term policing in the international community. The obsessive bipartisan quest to control nuclear proliferation— particularly since the end of the cold war—has been substantially counterproductive and has often inflicted major costs on innocent people. Rather than killing large numbers of foreigners in the service of worst case scenario fantasies, one way to reduce the likelihood some countries would go nuclear would be to stop threatening them.

CiteULike Connotea Del.icio.us Digg Reddit Technorati What's this?
|