Arguments for and against Democracy.

Thank you Con, for your points... "Voters in a democratic system might not make the best choice or the choice that truly best represents society's best interests, due to: several reasons.Democracies most often lend themselves to a small number of parties, where voters either have to conform to one group's values, ignore some of their own values in order to conform, or simply not participate in elections." The thing is not about whether the right choice is taken or not but the avaibility of the choice is what matters. This will be a elaboration of my second point. 2) Free and fair elections give a fair choice to the citizens to change the rulers and 3) The choice of changing rulers is available to all in an equal basis. ONE man/ ONE vote/ ONE value. In China, elections are regularly held every five years for electing the country's parliament, called Quanguo Renmin Daibiao Dahui (National People's Congress). The National people's congress has the power to appoint the president of the country. It has over 3000 members elected from all over China. Everything fine till here.... Before contesting an election, a candidate needs the approval of the Chinese Communist party. Only those who are members of this party can participate in the elections. Therefore, the government is always formed by the Chinese communist party. The communist party is very strong economically(due to various illegal reasons). So, every small party that comes up to participate in the elections end up joining the Chinese Communist party because of its financial and political influence. http://worldsavvy.org...Another instanc is Mexico. Since its independence in 1930, Mexico holds its elections after every six years. Until 2000, every election was won by the PRI(Institutional revolutionary Party) of mexico. Opposition never managed to win because PRI always used dirty tricks such as :- 1) The voting booths were shifted from one place to another in the last moment. 2) The teachers of Government schools had to force the parents of the students to vote for the PRI to save their jobs.3) Media was owned by the government. So, no opposition was faced by the PRI.4) All the government office bearers were forced and had to force others to vote for the PRI.5) Official meetings had to be attented by all where PRI was glorified in front of the public with the help of government funds. (election campaign) http://www.infoplease.com... So, What we see is that without free and fair electoral competitions, it is useless to consider elections. Also, please note the fact that those countries which do not follow the rules of a free and fair elections are lacking democracy. Ruling party must give a clear ground to the contestants of the elections. Campaigning should not be done with the government funds etc... are some basic rules which ensure free and fair elections and thus a good political scene.Also, Democracy is kind of directly proportional to Universal adult franchise. There are many instances here,1. In SAudi Arabia, women have no right to vote.2. In Estonia, Russian minority find it difficult to vote.3. In Fiji, the vote of an original Fijian has more value than the vote of an Indian- Fijian.The Universal Adult franchise can easily rebuttal the following argument too." Democracy often results in tyranny by majority, since a majority could blockade any measure intended to serve minority interests. Minorities may 'give up' on democracy, not voting due to the fact that their votes essentially do nothing unless more people agree with them.Tyranny by majority is as bad or worse than dictatorship." NO Tyranny by majority is what is a plus point for Democracy. This will be a elaboration of my point 7) Democracy provides a method to deal with differences and conflicts and 8) The fundamental rights enhances the dignity of a citizen...In any society, people are bound to have differences of opinions and interests. For eg- INDIA. There are Hindus, there are Muslims. Democracy protects the minorities with different well followed acts and also the fundamental rights. For instance, The scheduled tribes of India worked in lowly places, thus having low knowledge of high class jobs and education. Such people are allowed special cut off marks or have reserved seats. Muslims have reserved rights which Hindus as majority do not need. In a dictatorship, it is much possible that a holocaust like situation occurs. Many instances here, Syria situation, Myanmar, Saddam Hussain massacre.... In a democracy, people have some rights that can't be violated. If one wants to make music. He can do it in a democracy without supression from the government which is not the case with other forms. People, knowing that they have the rights gain confidence regadless of the fact whether they are the majority or the minority. Thus, dignity of the citizens enhances. Afterall, the root is People should be happy."Pure democracies are very slow and inefficient, since it takes a lot of time to count and recount referendums." This will be an elaboration of my point 6) Democracy improves the quality of decision making. Friends, what is better? Samsung to launch their Galaxy S5 tommorow with no refinement of features from S4 or to take their time and come up with an S5 that rocks the market and shoots up their finance? Obviously the latter. Democracy is based on discussions and consultations. A democratic decision always involves many persons, dicussions and meetings. This takes time. But when a lot of people are putting their heads together, the result which comes up is pure, refined and almost perfect. This is a plus for democracy. The decisions might take time but are very fine and supportive decisions. This reduces the chances of rash and irresponsible decisions seen in several countires like the countries in the Middle east. ELABORATION OF MY POINTS.1) Soveiregnity is strong as major decisions can only be taken by the elected representatives and no outside interference is legal.This is common and elaboration to this is not necessary. War on Iraq by US might have eshtablished so-so democracy but the democracy is not peaceful. Soviet Union support to the dictators in Europe(poland) led to violent strikes etc... See, outside interference from other countries leads to war not peace and such situations should be avoided. In a democracy, outside interference is illegal and ignored. Plus for democracy here because advice from other countries might lead to short term development but nothing but unstability will follow and when this will happen, the advicer will take no responsibility... "4) There is rule of law and respect for rights. "Zimbabwe attained its freedom through a freedom struggle where Robert Mugabe was a leading figure. After independence, Robert mugabe made himself the president. Good, he deserved it but here is the problem, since independence, ZANU-PF has been ruling the country... because Robert has decided to make him president for life! He changed the constitution frequently and made himself less acountable to. Even if he made wrong and illegal decisions, he easily escaped the law by changing the law itself... http://en.wikipedia.org...Such a situation is not present in a democracy. There is rule of law. i.e From a maid to the president is equal before the law. Murder by an engineer will lead to 10 years prison and the same will be for the president. " 5) A democratic government is a more accountable form of government,"China's famine of 1958-1961 was the worst in history. During that time, India's economic situation was nothing better but it did not face such an crisis... WHY? Economist think that this was a result of different government policies in the two countries. The existance of democracy in India made the Indian government respont to the critisising opposition and the media and the people were saved from a famine. Plus for democracy here too. It is a more accountable and dependable form of goverment. Rulers can't do what they wish and are easily guided to the right path by the opposition and the media. A democractic government requires to attend to the needs of the people. An oppsition and a press is free to critisise the government.http://en.wikipedia.org..."9) Democracy allows us to correct its own mistakes." Finally, democracy has the upperhand because it allows us to correct its own mistakes... There is no guarantee that mistakes will not be made. No form of government can guarantee that. The advantage of democracy is that such mistakes can't be hidden from the public for long. There is a space for public discussion and a room for correction too. Either the decision or the decision taker is changed. All of the above give democracy the upper hand. Democracy might not be perfect but is good and better than other forms for various reasons. Finally, in a nutshell :- Democracy gives everyman the right to be his own oppressor.Men's capacity for justice makes democracy possible, men's inclination to injustice makes democracy necessary.Democracy is device that ensures we shall be governed no better than we deserve and finallyAll ills of democracy can be cured by more democracy.