Pros And Cons Of The Democratic Peace Theory

The Democratic Peace Theory simply dictates, “a democracy will not go to war with another democracy” (Unit 7: Video Engager). There are several strengths of this theory and reasons why political scientists believe this is so. For example, those among a democracy are generally peacemakers and do not prefer war; thus leaders cannot make a decision to enter war without the permission of its people. In addition democratic counties are likely to be more established in infrastructure and riches; therefore democracies are less willing to enter war at risk of losing their assets. The Democratic Peace Theory had been used by policymakers to aid in the expansion of democracy throughout other countries. Policymakers such as Woodrow Wilson and George W. Bush believe in the positive outcome that the Democratic Peace Theory can bring. They consider that through spreading democracy to other countries means for a more peaceful world with less war. Although less war sounds perfect, this theory is still flawed. The chances of even going to war are slim to none. In addition to those small odds, democracies are at odds it self as there are not many democracies around the world yet. With that being said, “it's a bit premature to say that democracies never go to war with one another” (Unit 7: Video Engager). In fact, there has been an exception; the Spanish American War was between two democracies. This leads to
Initially this theory seems to possess many strengths however I feel that policymakers should not use this theory, as it appears to be illogical and flawed. Especially as democracy spreads, we can never be certain that two democratic countries will not enter war against one another. Policymakers have to consider that our world is so diverse when it comes to values, morals, and foreign-policy goals, therefore expecting the idea of democracy to keep the peace is a flawed