A Totalatarian State is more effective than a Democratic State

Since you have not specified which system of democracy you prefer i will just assume it is representative democracy. This is because both in the U. S and India we have those democratic systems. BoP is shared since i didnt specifyMy arguement will center around 3 key points1. EffectivenessA moderate Totalatarian state does not require the authority of a Senate and House. This means that desicions can be made quick. This is especially important in a time of need. A prime example of this is the Hurricane Sandy Relief Bill. Because republicans and democrats were wasting time putting their own pork barrel projects spending in the bill people were being injured and losing homes in the devastating wake of Sandy. Neither party wanted to affirm the bill in either houses of congress because they did not want to let the other party have their ways. A Totalatarian government would be able to send help right away and not have any delay. Things like pork barrel projects and hiding laws in bills wouldnt exist because they wouldnt be needed. Needless spending of tax payers dollars wouldnt be fought over. Many of the projects that republicans and democrats were proposing were donations to keep muesuems running. Because of this the relief money came very late to those who were in need. http://www.newsbusters.org...2. No deceitLike i briefly mentioned in point one hiding laws into bills is a very common thing to do in the USA. When democrats and republicans worked together on a sex trafficing law everything was looking good. Then it was seen that the republicans hid a Hyde Amendment to stop federal spending on abortions. Not only was this uncalled for but created more distrust between the parties. This is again another example of people decieving each other to get their way. Because of this the sex trafficing law was extremely delayed because of the upset in the Democratic party. . http://www.newsmax.com...3. Economically beneficalIn a totaltarinstic state the surivival of the fittest rules the market while those who are without are provided for. A key example of this is Benito Mussolin's and Adolf Hitler's rule in their own respective countries. The process inclues a nationalzation of mostly all items in the country. This creates a huge surplus and money flow into the country. Right now democracies rely on the global trade. While this is good it is only is small amounts. Leaning too much on the back of the globe can backfire. For example the US is heavily reliant on China for the exchanging of goods. Because of this everytime they go down in their economy we go down too. However a fascist economy is extremely benficial. Unemployment under hitler fell below one percent and their economy was shown as an economic super power. Reliance on others in the world is a terrible mistake because it leads to a domino effect of everyone falling down except for the domino that is by itself. https://en.wikipedia.org...https://en.wikipedia.org...I will provide more points and add rebuttals next round. Back to you ConSources:. http://www.newsbusters.org...http://www.newsmax.com...https://en.wikipedia.org...https://en.wikipedia.org...