Democracy vs Autocracy.

Let me make my stance clear.Autocracy is the necessary prerequisite for democracy.It is the autocracy that gives a country structure and differentiates it from an unruly mob.Then and ONLY THEN can a democracy be fostered.Thus, if democracy needs autocracy, but autocracy doesn't need democracy, then surely autocracy must be a better system of governance than democracy.The opponent didn't respond to my argument; I made it clear that it is the PRO's burden to prove to us why and how democracy can stand without a previous autocratic system. They didn't follow through with the burden.Let's move onto my rebuttals:1. VisionariesWhile this argument misleadingly says "visionaries", this is actually about the system of checks and balances that limit the potential growth of a country. He gives us examples of "good" leaders-- as if the world is so black and white that all presidents are good and all rulers are bad. That is sadly not the case.2. FreedomsDid you know that there are currently more failed democratic states than autocratic states?Developing countries need autocracy to form an economic basis that they can grow from.***I'll cover this more in my extensions***3. For Developing Countries, Autocracy is UnnaceptableThis is blatantly incorrect. Let's see why.Extensons:A. Need for AutocracyA study shown in the Economist tells us:"What makes ethnically diverse but autocratic China different, given it has enjoyed rapid growth for the past two decades? Rapid growth is one thing. In 1980, India (pro-democrati) and China (pro-autocratic) were both in relative autarky. By 2007, India’s GDP had almost doubled, but China’s increased seven-fold. India’s growth was primarily services (farming) led; China’s was industry based. China’s fast growth owed to state autocratic policy, Jeffrey Sachs and Messrs Acemoglu and Robinson agree." Therefore, this shows us that for beginning countries that are new to the world stage, they need a firm hand to provide a firm base. Considering the fact that there are more developing countries that developed, this needs to be seriously considered. B. Change in Leadership Changes in leadership are actually much more frequent that the PRO would have you believe (probably because they use the cliched example of North Korea) I quote: "Second, if our view of successful autocracy is correct, we should find that high growth autocracies have higher leadership turnover than expected. This turns out to be the case. The probability of leadership change every year is 13% for high growth autocracies and 7% for low growth ones." Thus autocracies are NOT the evil dictatorships that everyone stereotypes them to be. I mean, what are you guys C. Faster Action "According to statistics, the time required to implement a bill in India (Democratic nation) is 1,420 days while in China (Autocratic nation) is a mere 292 days. Visionary leaders can accomplish more in autocratic than democratic governments because they need not heed legislative, judicial, or media constraints in promoting their agenda. In the late 1970s, Deng Xiaoping made the decision to open communist China to private incentives in agriculture, and in a remarkably short time farm output increased dramatically. Autocratic rulers in Taiwan, South Korea, Singapore, and Chile produced similar quick turnabouts in their economies by making radical changes that usually involved a greater role for the private sector and private business" The PRO might say bad dictators make for a bad country, but all I can say is: We live in a country where we'd had 2 Bushes in a row. Now there's a third, and you're worried about dictators? An autocracy is like a family. The father is the stern figure that has almost complete control over the family. He can buy whatever he wants, he can teach however he wants. It's in his best interests to keep the family happy because otherwise, the children will rebel and his wife might leave-- which is her trump card. Now, I ask you: How much did you love your father? Thank you, and may the better debater win! ------------ Sources: http://www.voxeu.org... http://www.economist.com... http://casacio.blogspot.com... http://www.becker-posner-blog.com... http://psychology.about.com... https://www.quora.com... https://www.opendemocracy.net... http://nationalinterest.org...