>>170577, >>170578, >>170579, >>170580, >>170581, >>170582, >>170583, >>170584, >>170585, >>170586, >>170587, >>170588, >>170589, >>170590, >>170591
DataRepublican (small r) @DataRepublican - HOW MASS MIGRATION HAPPENED, A TIMELINE: The EU's Crisis Didn't Start in Brussels; It Started in Washington
I first meant this as a reply to @DeputySecState, but decided it warrants its own post.
Today on X, there is plenty of criticism of the EU's lack of accountability. What gets ignored is that the same mentality operates at the UN level and, in many ways, originates in the United States. I'll refer to this shared ideology as "democracy" - air quotes intentional, because that's the vocabulary they use.
Take mass migration as a case study.
George W. Bush's Freedom Agenda tried to impose democracy on the Middle East by force. The "democracy" camp embraced that project enthusiastically. When the effort unraveled between 2004 and 2006, "democracy" didn't reassess its premises. Instead, it blamed Bush. The corrective, in their view, was to intensify multilateralism and purge anything that resembled national / American loyalty.
More money flowed into NGOs almost immediately. Then came the Arab Spring. The "democracy" believers proclaimed a new era for the Middle East. When the revolutions collapsed, they didn't question their framework. They concluded instead that they lacked sufficient control over events on the ground: authoritarian leaders had too much leverage over local NGOs.
This realization didn't stop them from funding those NGOs. They continued pouring public money into the region despite knowing that strongmen would divert large portions of it. That is how U.S. taxpayers end up financing the Taliban: all in the name of "democracy."
So what follows if you believe the Middle East must be democratized but you can't achieve it within its borders?
You change the borders.
16