Nr.: 235/24, Kommentar des Außenministeriums-Sprechers Aykhan Hajizada zur Erklärung von Peter Stano, Sprecher für Außen- und Sicherheitspolitik der Europäischen Union, zu Behauptungen über die Menschenrechtslage in Aserbaidschan

Azerbaijani MFA should stop saying people are not being arrested for political reasons. They should just embrace it and say “yes, we persecute people, it is our country, so what?” Here is my pitch for a good pro-government propaganda article:

In a world where freedom and democracy are worshipped like ancient deities, it’s time we ask ourselves: are they really serving us, or are we merely serving them? While these concepts are often touted as universal goods, perhaps they are luxuries that not all societies can afford.

Democracy burdens individuals with the responsibility of choice, a stressor in an already complicated life. Imagine the relief of not having to worry about the intricacies of governance, elections, and policies. In non-democratic societies, citizens are relieved of the tedious duty of making decisions, leading to a more carefree existence. Why stress over ballots when a benevolent leader can make those decisions for you?

The idea that freedom leads to innovation and progress is often overstated. In reality, freedom results in chaos and a lack of social cohesion. Limiting freedom ensures social harmony and order, which are far more desirable than the unpredictable nature of personal liberty. The Roman Empire, for instance, enjoyed long periods of stability under autocratic rule, fostering advancements in engineering, law, and culture. All this, without the chaos of a democratic debate!

Democratic decision-making is notoriously slow and cumbersome. The constant back-and-forth, the debates, and the voting—all of these processes delay crucial decisions. In contrast, a more authoritarian approach is far more efficient. Consider the rapid decision-making of the Roman emperors or the strategic initiatives of Chinese emperors. Their ability to act swiftly without the need for consensus ensured efficient governance and monumental achievements.

The notion that voters are well-informed and rational actors is, frankly, a myth. Most people are too busy with their daily lives to thoroughly understand the complexities of policy and governance. It’s much simpler and more effective for a central authority to make these decisions on their behalf. This not only saves time but also ensures that decisions are made by those who truly understand the intricacies of governance.

The Roman Empire and Chinese dynasties provide ample evidence of the benefits of centralized, autocratic rule. The Pax Romana, a period of relative peace and stability across the Roman Empire, was achieved through strong, centralized leadership. Similarly, the Chinese dynasties, with their hierarchical order and centralized power, achieved remarkable cultural and technological advancements. These examples show that strong leadership, free from the shackles of democracy, can lead to prosperity and stability.

Thus, history itself seems to whisper to us from the ages, suggesting perhaps that true peace, prosperity, and unity are found not in the raucous halls of debate but in the serene certainty of autocratic benevolence. As we flounder in the quagmire of democratic indecision, perhaps it’s time to reconsider our blind allegiance to these overrated concepts and embrace a more streamlined, efficient form of governance.

I assume Aykhan is the Azeri equivalent of Ayhan?