I'm not sure why a "neo-Caliphate" would be such a dreadful thing. The version of Islam practiced by the Ottoman Turks, for instance, wasn't nearly as oppressive as that practiced in Saudi Arabia today (indeed, wasn't Wahhabism a Puritanical reaction of Ottoman permissiveness?).
And, look at the other side of the coin: Why should the fate of the Saudi royal family (a corrupt and abusive pack of nepotistic monarchists) be worth a bucket of lukewarm spit to the United States? From the perspective of democratic ideals, wouldn't a popular theocracy be "better" than an unpopular monarchy?
But, of course, the United States is a plutocratic country, not a democracy (or even a republic), and corrupt absolute monarchs are very convenient for big business, whereas theocracies tend to actually believe in things other than the all-dissolving lubricating power of cash.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2004-09-14 10:13 pm (UTC)And, look at the other side of the coin: Why should the fate of the Saudi royal family (a corrupt and abusive pack of nepotistic monarchists) be worth a bucket of lukewarm spit to the United States? From the perspective of democratic ideals, wouldn't a popular theocracy be "better" than an unpopular monarchy?
But, of course, the United States is a plutocratic country, not a democracy (or even a republic), and corrupt absolute monarchs are very convenient for big business, whereas theocracies tend to actually believe in things other than the all-dissolving lubricating power of cash.