Why Democracy is more beneficial to Rulers than Dictatorship?

[Icecreamcart]

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).

Your definition is somewhat lacking. It's the 51% that overrules the other 49%. The 26% that controls the winning 51%. The 14% that controls the 26%. And so and on until you get to the point where the entire process is subtlety influenced by a few selected elites.

In any case, for both democracies and dictatorships, we're at the whims of the minority. The only saving grace for some democracies is the countries' rule of law which keeps most abuses of power in check.

There are many ways for a democracy to have traits of dictatorships. For example, loopholes in the legal system would allow lawmakers and those in influential positions to game the system for personal benefits.

Voting laws can be subtly altered to provide advantages to certain groups, an example, historical gerrymandering or laws that make certain groups harder to vote.

And don't get started on lobbying. That's an evil beast that controls every aspect of democracies, in a way that's even greater than in dictatorships.

And in the end, people living in 'democracies' comfort themselves, believing them to be superior to people living in dictatorships, regardless of the efficiency of their government. They feel justified as seeing themselves as free people and look down on others. Case in point, American exceptionalism, with its chauvinistic framing of American culture as superior to all others. In Australia, you occasionally see extreme right-wing politicians beating the message that asylum seekers are inferior people.

 

[chauism]

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.

The question reminds that do you trust those voters to pick up the people to run the government, for me I don't even trust them for picking up my laundries. If any policy or politican should be decided by voting, I believe those who vote should at least qualified to vote on those. Voting right shouldn't be granted because you are at certain age, it should be earned through meritocracy or something like hard working or even stealing without getting caught as it also require certain kind of skill to prove that you deserves it just like everything else in life.

 

[Holmes]

Capitalism and all evil forms also exist in this system also. The global scams and corruption has reached heights of trillions.

 

[Ahmad]

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.

It is not the fault of those corrupt people if the public keep on electing them. If the voters punish them with their votes, i am sure they will expose all the wrong doers while they are in office the next time. It's all in our hand. But tell me what options and powers will the likes of you and me have if a dictatorship is in place?

 

[chauism]

It is not the fault of those corrupt people if the public keep on electing them. If the voters punish them with their votes, i am sure they will expose all the wrong doers while they are in office the next time. It's all in our hand. But tell me what options and powers will the likes of you and me have if a dictatorship is in place?

The threat of revolution to overthrow them.

 

[Ahmad]

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).

ohh strange thing coming from T.J. If it wasnt for democracy, he probably be an unknown man with wasted talent in his country. It was democracy and power of vote which recognized him. Democracy might be mob rule as he says because 51% take away the right of 49%, but it is a million times better than other systems that 5% take away the right of 95%.

 

[scorpionx]

It is not the fault of those corrupt people if the public keep on electing them. If the voters punish them with their votes, i am sure they will expose all the wrong doers while they are in office the next time. It's all in our hand. But tell me what options and powers will the likes of you and me have if a dictatorship is in place?

I am not in favor of dictatorship at all my friend. In India whom the voters will punish? All the politicians are more or less same when they find their chair in New Delhi. We have a very full proof system on paper but the politicians have been very much successful to find out the loopholes.
But one thing we must acknowledge about our democracy is the free press. Each and every movement of the government and the opposition is being scrutinized by electronic media. Thanks to them for finding out people like kalmadi and Raja,which is a dream under a dictatorship.

 

[Ahmad]

The threat of revolution to overthrow them.

You know what, revolution might work in times, but it doesnt have to be the very attractive option. I say this because we had a revolution about 4 decades ago only to be replaced with something worse which is extended to present day. Revolution in Tunisia worked, but it was nothing but a complete destruction in Lybia and Syria. Personally, i will have revolution last in the list.

 

[chauism]

You know what, revolution might work in times, but it doesnt have to be the very attractive option. I say this because we had a revolution about 4 decades ago only to be replaced with something worse which is extended to present day. Revolution in Tunisia worked, but it was nothing but a complete destruction in Lybia and Syria. Personally, i will have revolution last in the list.

So are elections. I don't see people replace someone better with elections either. The difference here is with revolution the threat of losing power is real, with election those who hold the real powers behind the scense will never feel threatened as the next elected one is just as manipulatable as the previous one, and as the average people will even realize that because they think at least they have a voice in the decision making process.

 

[AHMED85]

Democracy with its Real Core is good Channel to Run the State...

After all some time intellectual Dictatorship also have good ways to Run the state...When there is no valid & wise Democracy and leader ship existing...

 

[Ahmad]

I am not in favor of dictatorship at all my friend. In India whom the voters will punish? All the politicians are more or less same when they find their chair in New Delhi. We have a very full proof system on paper but the politicians have been very much successful to find out the loopholes.
But one thing we must acknowledge about our democracy is the free press. Each and every movement of the government and the opposition is being scrutinized by electronic media. Thanks to them for finding out people like kalmadi and Raja,which is a dream under a dictatorship.

In this case, why not electing some independent dudes rather than relying on the usual corrupt parties and politicians?

 

[scorpionx]

In this case, why not electing some independent dudes rather than relying on the usual corrupt parties and politicians?

Gaining 2/3rd majority is not possible for independent candidates and we have to find out solutions from the present running system itself. What we need is to make these politicians answerable more and more to press, judiciary and an autonomous body like comptrollers and auditors general of India. And also strict punishment for them like hanging in case found guilty in corruption cases. There should be strict eligibility criterias to be a minister too to refrain any illiterate criminal to be a leader of our nation.

 

[Ahmad]

So are elections. I don't see people replace someone better with elections either. The difference here is with revolution the threat of losing power is real, with election those who hold the real powers behind the scense will never feel threatened as the next elected one is just as manipulatable as the previous one, and as the average people will even realize that because they think at least they have a voice in the decision making process.

Well, if people have the desire and determination to replace the current authorities with force of revolution, then why wasting that much energy and time plus the posibility of destruction and killing to choose the harsh way of revolution? If they have the determination they can choose the easy, effective way of voting to kick them out.

And yes, the people have a strong say in decision making, just need to use it.

 

[chauism]

In this case, why not electing some independent dudes rather than relying on the usual corrupt parties and politicians?

Well, if people have the desire and determination to replace the current authorities with force of revolution, then why wasting that much energy and time plus the posibility of destruction and killing to choose the harsh way of revolution? If they have the determination they can choose the easy, effective way of voting to kick them out.

And yes, the people have a strong say in decision making, just need to use it.

I think you just answered yourself, that is why i said I just don't trust average voters.

 

[Ahmad]

I think you just answered yourself, that is why i said I just don't trust average voters.

so, whom do you trust then?