i heard on the radio this morning that a poll conducted around the world showed that most people would prefer John Kerry as president rather than Bush. Now of course i couldn't agree more (lesser of two evils?), but then my first reaction was that not being a US citizen, it doesnt really matter what I think or who I think should be president of the US, as I don't have the right to vote and its not my country anyway why should I have a say. and in that line of thought the same applies to all those "people around the world" in the poll, its great (as far as i'm concerned) the preference for Kerry, but if you're not a US citizen it doesnt really make a difference anymore than my opinion. and neither should it?

but then I was thinking, we live in a different world. back then there was a time when the world was a lot bigger and each country to a certain extent somewhat to its own. and the creation of democracy was with that intent, that its somthing internal to the nation and the stakeholders, are the people of the nation.

but then the election of a leader of a nation effects the nation's policies and actions, and of interest to me right now is its effects on a nation's foreign policies and actions, which in turn have an effect (good or bad) on foreign nations, sometimes to drastic effects (see Iraq?). and the stakeholders are then no longer merely the people of the nation but those outside who could and probably would be effected by it. be it by direct, explict military actions, or more subtle economic strategies and policies.

so in our new, smaller, interconnected, "butterfly-effect" world, how should the new democracy work then?