Statistics show “CRIME” has achieved industry status with a far larger turnover than the top corporate in Industry. It generates and provides employment creating an “economic strength” that exceeds the economies of “many” nations!

Crime and Terrorism grow together as economic partners, and expand their influence because they can exploit the 'democratic ideology of a society' that offers protection to all based on individual rights', and welcomes visitors or persons, including those who may not respect the freedom and rights of others. A progressive democratic society that gives 'equal rights and protection without discrimination' is thus vulnerable in a Non Linear era!!

Paradoxically and by design, a democratic criminal justice system seems to require the precondition of extreme violence and chaos in order to consider change to invoke preventive laws. (Terrorist attacks of September 2001 will lead to major changes.)

In new democracies, we have seen ethnic cleansing and religious tension as an underlying and early feature. The usage of violence for political and economic control is common within a fledgling Democracy. Religion seems to provide the social justification for violence, while Democracy provides the legal right within individual civil liberties. Despite a long history of co-existence of various religions- we are now faced with ethnic strife in the recent few decades.
Why hasn't education been able to remove such bigotry??

When religion suddenly appears to be the chosen solution or cause for strife – Non Linear Thinking reveals that it is proof that a “new” reason is being sought by those seeking control to explain the lack of economic opportunity. It is far easier for political bigots and leaders to invent religious reasons for inequality then offer solutions that can equalize.
Unfortunately and paradoxically, society accepts this logic because it satisfies what modern commerce. seems to support - eliminate competition first!

We need to acknowledge that modern Democracy has identified ONLY “economics” to be the equalizer and tool to express democratic rights. The manifestation and success of Democracy is evaluated in economic terms. Even judicial justice is finally dispensed in economic terms.

The poor developing countries are therefore ideal targets for Criminals such as the drug–cartels. We should forecast that the economic power of crime within these economies will continuously proliferate and grow because the dividing line between what is legal and illegal can be shrouded within a democratic ideology, very easily aided by corruption in any infrastructure deficient economy.

Democracy amidst poverty at best can get a good start with the World community providing lip service and support, based on the noble intentions of some “new political warrior”. This new leader would have strategically won democratic elections on the basis of recent tragedy and promise of a governance that will create ‘equal opportunity’ . In time the opposite happens. Within a poor infrastructure, a weak judiciary and low income, an ideal environment is born to allow a political - criminal nexus, preventing the progress and benefits of Democracy to extend beyond the favored few!

The criminalization of politics, corruption and economic chaos immediately come to the forefront as the inevitable result - wherever Democracy attempts to give Individual Rights within a “deficient Infrastructure”.
So, with ill-equipped governance, corrupt enforcement and judiciary, can we prevent violence? Unlikely - if we attempt to implement and interpret Democracy based on 'old definitions'. The need for change is obvious. ( See "Enlarging Democracy" )

Today our infrastructure is designed to protect the “potential” victims of crime. In this Non Linear era we need to use NLT to ask whether is it easier/more economical to detect or forecast the likely perpetrator or identification of the emanating areas that create and induce crime( as a preventive)? When compared to creating a system that can afford the cost of protecting the potential and unknown victims of crime? (this means everyone!)

The practice of “curfew” in developing countries has been the only way to prevent trouble. It has worked but it merely alleviates the symptom and does not even look at the cause. Unfortunately Democracy allows only the “Army” to impose a curfew after all else has failed.
Paradox: It seems almost natural by design that coups and army rule are most likely in poor democracies, amidst poor infrastructure.

NLT believes that the collapse of Democracy in infrastructure-deficient countries should soon see a change in Democratic ideology. A frustrated people may start to accept or prefer an autocratic rule which protects the larger community - while accepting a reduced individual freedom. NLT believes that this will be perceived as a fair exchange by the citizens within many ASIAN countries where equal opportunity has evaded the majority even within Democracy.

Traditional democratic values prevent us from restricting individual rights - despite knowing WHO is responsible for crime against society; the potential perpetrator is well profiled.

Result: 1000’s of innocent people are killed and millions of potential victims remain unprotected to the power of drugs, crime, terrorism and violence within Democracy.

This is not the intended result of Democracy. There is now the need for redefinition and change, specifically in poor economies that do not have the infrastructure and funds to wage an economic linear fight against crime. The developed economies like the US would resist to make a change in their civil liberties, because they can perhaps AFFORD the economic cost of attempting to "maintain freedom and Democracy". In the US, Democracy and freedom are expressed in economic terms and lifestyle. Asian countries cannot afford to emulate this model to "maintain Democracy in a Non Linear era because they cannot provide protection to their billions. They must choose preventive measures WHICH WILL diminish the individuals right; but enlarge the benefits to the entire community.

The US of A has a huge police force and perhaps the perception that society has sufficient funds to combat violence. Yet the Rodney King trial created violence, that was uncontrollable. People behaved as if they “forgot” the reason of the court sentence. Almost all victims were unconnected to the trial, and inadvertently became part of the symptom It was difficult to forecast the chaos, and the mayhem. Not many expected the Asian community to be the targets.

These social reactions actually expressed the resentment towards the economic success of immigrants, who are then easily seen as outsiders who have deprived the 'older residents of their economic opportunity'. Unemployed youth reacted to express "their own economic problem"; If that was the underlying issue, it probably remains unattended till today! (1998 - The collapse of the Indonesian economy resulted in the same reaction against ethnic Chinese.)

Violence has become a democratic society’s most expressive action; because irrespective of the issue, the protest is almost always about the 'lack of equal economic opportunity'. Though all special interest groups would vehemently oppose any recommended change to the interpretation of Democracy we must push ahead anyway for the sake of the future of economic growth.

NLT can attempt a separate re-interpretation for BOTH, developed and under developed economies. Even though our main concern here is for developing economies within South Asia ( who have no resources to afford a learning curve); we need to identify the difference. There would have to be different definitions for 'the developed world and the developing and underdeveloped fledgling democracies. The difference could be identified by infrastructure, literacy and state of the economy at the point of START.

FOR DEVELOPED ECONOMIES IN THE WEST HAVING STABLE POPULATIONS AND DEVELOPED INFRASTRUCTURE WE CAN ATTEMPT TO MAKE THE FIRST RULES AND A BASIC DICTATE: EVERY INDIVIDUAL WITHIN THE DEVELOPED ECONOMIES MUST HAVE FULL ECONOMIC FREEDOM AND FREEDOM OF ASSOCIATION FOR ECONOMIC GAIN. THE INDIVIDUAL CAN DO "WHAT EVER THEY LIKE" BUT "HOW THEY DO IT- HAS TO BE RESTRICTED TO PROTECT THE ECONOMIC INTERESTS OF SOCIETY. The misuse of Democracy specifically for economic gain could be a fair disqualification OF INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS.

In developed economies, a large section of society suffers because of too much liberty available to individuals and small groups which enables them to legally exploit the tenets of the Democratic and criminal justice system for ECONOMIC advantage, OR because of their own ECONOMIC STRENGTH RELATIVE TO THE VICTIM!!
FOR DEVELOPING AND OVER POPULATED POOR ECONOMIES THE “RIGHTS” CANNOT BE THE SAME!

Non Linear Thinking requires that the 'inverse' democratic principle be applicable to a populous and poor developing Democracy.

Within a developing, populous or underdeveloped economy individual rights for economic activity must also be 'liberal BUT specified and specific'. THE INDIVIDUAL CANNOT BE PERMITTED TO DO WHAT THEY LIKE. The curtailment is dependant on the extent and availability of infrastructure, and hence economic rights have to PRIORITIZED. BUT FOR THE FEW ECONOMIC AREAS WHERE THE SPECIFIC RIGHT IS GRANTED THEN THERE SHOULD BE NO CONTROLS ON THE "HOW"!!! THE RESTRICTED FREEDOM IN SOME AREAS IS COMPENSATED BY THE COMPLETE FREEDOM WITHIN THE SPECIFIED AND DEVELOPED AREA!!

Infrastructure is the only resource that permits “equalization” for a greater number and till it is in place individuals rights have to be curtailed, or as we have experienced the favored few get to control the limited resources that are available!!. Both the interpretations seek to retain democratic values, but with an important change that enlarges the value and permits implementation.

In poor economies - there is not enough money or infrastructure to allow individuals to do WHAT they please! Democracy however must allow full freedom in THE SPECIFIC areas as the infrastructure is available or industrial competition created to provide equal opportunity. Within the SPECIFIED ECONOMIC ACTIVITY; the democratic policy must allow total freedom on HOW the citizens exercise their granted economic right. There should be negligible political or hierarchical control that regulates the procedures of how!

Economic freedom is thus the first area and policy; wherever a product group, or industry group ( Say, an agricultural or industrial product) is competitive and in surplus. This segment must be permitted full freedom and free trade status. This implies freedom of access and opportunity.

PARADOXICALLY, Democracy can negate its own development - if it is not controlled because a minority is able to prevent equal economic opportunity for the majority. It could explain why Singapore has been so successful, or why India though correctly democratic, has been unable to use Democracy for the benefit of its people, and perhaps why China has had remarkable growth.

As the infrastructure improves with economics, the democratic values can and must be enlarged. This can become the transparent basis of international monitoring, pressure and economic support to keep Democracy vibrant and dynamic in the developing world!!