In another panel on June 5, 2007 at the Prague conference on "Democracy and Security: Core Values and Sound Policies," Mr. Kramer delivered a speech that he fashioned as a direct challenge to Mr. Bush, who was set to deliver his own remarks in the same room hours later, and challenged the Bush doctrine's core tenant that democracy promotion ultimately serves the interests of America's national security.

"Democracy competes not against them, but against this consensual authoritarianism," Mr. Kramer said in Prague. "And the reason democracy is losing that competition is that consensual authoritarianism produces security for its peoples, and exports security to its neighbors and the world."

What a lunatic. Anyone who can use the words 'consensual' and 'authoritarianism' together without blinking is obviously deranged or incapable (perhaps by choice) of understanding basic logic.

However, it does strike me as true that democracy - a form of authoritarianism - DOES compete against other forms of authoritarianism. And it's probably true that democracy 'works' (that is, makes the most powerful and destructive states, like the U.S.) best with a population sophisticated enough to participate but unsophisticated enough so that large numbers of them believe they are actually owners of the government they are participating in - which is of course a logical impossibility. As more and more people see the lie in collectivist government, democracy will become as unworkable for the power-hungry as (for instance) monarchy is now in the West. It will be interesting to see what new stratagems the power-hungry try at that point to hold onto their power over others.

¶ 1:50 PM