Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

[IND151]

hello friends, today i am going to post my analysis which depicts Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

Dictatorship >

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual: a dictator.


Democracy>

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.

Analysis

in dictatorship, people suffer from dictatorship,denial of many rights and right to criticize government.

this,sometimes, results in building of anger among masses, which if not checked on time, results in

the Dictator and his regime being toppled.

In Democracy, however, Top Authorities deliberately allow every person to join politics,being candidate for election,right to criticize state (up to a extent) and right to vote.

Reason is, they want to let the people join politics and try to change system, only to realize that they cant change system beyond a limit; a limit created by combination of several factors like profit seeking business elites who fund political parties and dominate Government Decisions , corrupt bureaucracy, number of socio-economical problems.

they also want to show the people that without money you can not win elections.

after seeing this, people who want to bring change in system especially youth, loses hope and gives up fighting corrupt system; those who still join politics are either forced to use unethical means to grab power or risk being a party without power.

In Democracy, agenda of Elites to keep people out of politics as much as possible is more successful,as people themselves choose to do so, after being tired of effort to bring change.

Examples> 1. fall of Janta govt., after which youth and middle class of India lost interest in politics and political movements.

2. Andolan of Anna Hazare, which has lost its influence compared to last year.

Note> this thread is based on my Analysis. your opinion is welcome,members.

 

[Snomannen]

Dumb people have to be ruled by the wise one.

 

[Developereo]

While democracy works well in small settings, it fails utterly beyond a certain point.

On a national level, democracy is just stealth dictatorship by the media oligarchy, since a handful of media moguls control the national discourse and the agenda for elected politicians.

 

[IND151]

Poll added

 

[scorpionx]

At present democracy is controlled by a bunch of dictators. General public are only mute spectators to the current happenings in several part of our country. For example Chief minister of West Bengal has turned into a pure dictator after being elected through a democratic system. Personally I want all the names of the persons who have black money kept in swiss bank to be published to the Indians but none of the democratically elected government will dare to do so. If I fail to submit a small amount of income tax a pool of government servants will be behind me to put myself behind the bar but it is not the case for democratically elected politicians and businessmen like Ambanis.

 

[IND151]

^^ what you mentioned in first sentence, started happening in US in 1950s and in India since late 1960s

months ago, i watched a documentary Capitalism curse? on HBO

was good and worth watching

it shows how American elites are afraid of right to vote because they feel that with this masses can threaten their aims.

it also shows American Dream has come true only for handful people

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

hello friends, today i am going to post my analysis which depicts Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

Dictatorship >

A dictatorship is defined as an autocratic form of government in which the government is ruled by an individual: a dictator.


Democracy>

Democracy is a form of government in which all eligible citizens have an equal say in the decisions that affect their lives. Democracy allows people to participate equally—either directly or through elected representatives—in the proposal, development, and creation of laws. It encompasses social, economic and cultural conditions that enable the free and equal practice of political self-determination.

Analysis

in dictatorship, people suffer from dictatorship,denial of many rights and right to criticize government.

this,sometimes, results in building of anger among masses, which if not checked on time, results in

the Dictator and his regime being toppled.

In Democracy, however, Top Authorities deliberately allow every person to join politics,being candidate for election,right to criticize state (up to a extent) and right to vote.

Reason is, they want to let the people join politics and try to change system, only to realize that they cant change system beyond a limit; a limit created by combination of several factors like profit seeking business elites who fund political parties and dominate Government Decisions , corrupt bureaucracy, number of socio-economical problems.

they also want to show the people that without money you can not win elections.

after seeing this, people who want to bring change in system especially youth, loses hope and gives up fighting corrupt system; those who still join politics are either forced to use unethical means to grab power or risk being a party without power.

In Democracy, agenda of Elites to keep people out of politics as much as possible is more successful,as people themselves choose to do so, after being tired of effort to bring change.

Examples> 1. fall of Janta govt., after which youth and middle class of India lost interest in politics and political movements.

2. Andolan of Anna Hazare, which has lost its influence compared to last year.

Note> this thread is based on my Analysis. your opinion is welcome,members.

I would prefer a democratic system any day than a dictatorship.

It is true that a saint can't reach a powerful position in democratic system and with out power you can't do much to change the system.At many levels he will be forced to make compromises.. but what makes a good politician and ruler is while making small compromises and step backs he should be able to do bigger and better things for the country.it is like a chess, to win the game you need to sacrifice a few pawns.
Take Mr. A.K Antony our defence minister , he has other weakness but not corrupt , but I believe he surely has made small compromises , kept silence on certain corruption which he is aware of , etc to reach where he is..


so it's not about being 100% corruption free or straight forward but rather making small compromises to reach up and stay in and do greater amount of good things and make good policies. one more angle to look at it is , if you don't make small compromises to reach in power somebody else who is worst and with ultimate aim to make money any how will occupy the position..

I believe even if anna hazare starts a party they too will have to make small compromises to reach power.if he fails to do small compromises more corrupt people will continue to be in power

 

[IND151]

^^ i agree with your post

BTW i am not supporting Dictatorship

i am just showing Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

 

[JanjaWeed]

A democracy is nothing more than mob rule, where fifty-one percent of the people may take away the rights of the other forty-nine... (quote by Thomas Jefferson).

 

[Battle of Bach Dang River]

Dictatorship, we can imagine it is similar to a certain of goods in a market with only a supplier. If so, consumers have only a choice, and the supplier does not try to improve their goods better. Instead, they will increase the price while the quality of their goods increasingly worse....

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

^^ i agree with your post

BTW i am not supporting Dictatorship

i am just showing Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

but isn't some kind of accountability is better than no accountability at all as in a dictatorship ?

yes if the dictator is good and capable corruption can be controlled..but what if he is not ?

 

[chauism]

but isn't some kind of accountability is better than no accountability at all as in a dictatorship ?

yes if the dictator is good and capable corruption can be controlled..but what if he is not ?

I think the problem with dictatorship is not because it is undomecratic, like you said it is its accoutability to themselves and to the public.


"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that"--George Carlin
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."--Winston Churchill

However with domecracy even with its accoutability I can not appreciate it with notion that the society is being rule by the mob of mediocrity or even worse idiocracy.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

I think the problem with dictatorship is not because it is undomecratic, like you said it is its accoutability to themselves and to the public.


"Think of how stupid the average person is, and realize half of them are stupider than that"--George Carlin
"The best argument against democracy is a five-minute conversation with the average voter."--Winston Churchill

However with domecracy even with its accoutability I can not appreciate it with notion that the society is being rule by the mob of mediocrity or even worse idiocracy.

yes average people can be stupid but it can be compensated to a certain extend if the people in power are wise enough. that's why sometimes govt 's make unpopular decisions at times because they know it is for the best interest of people even though people hate the decision.

 

[Killuminati]

Whats the diffirence between a dictator and a king or queen? Todays Royal House of England is not symbolic but pure the reigning power of England. What you call this? Modern dictatorship? Man never saw so much hypocrisy than the politics of West. They blame middle-east for their dictators but they are self the dictators under the name democracy. Give the people the feeling that they have a voice while there is not such a thing.

 

[Al Bhatti]

The so called democracy in Pakistan is in fact a Dictorship. Which party has internal elections to bring forward the best person forward to lead a party, or is it that the same person we see is the best in 180+ million period.

Almost every time same parties / persons rule the same states / cities every time elections are held.

US system can be a good thing if implemented correctly and honestly in Pakistan; two or three or four parties should be allowed, who ever wants to serve the nation comes forward and does things to prove his worth and then joins one of the parties, and if he is really worth it he then climbs the ladder and becomes a President / Prime Minister.

He wont show up again after 2 terms, and new person takes over to move on as per what he sees best. Country moves on, leadership moves on, new faces come, things keep changing from good to better. Win win for everyone.