Why Democracy is the Best Form of Government Essay

In truth, democracy has helped to stabilize and also create unity among citizens. It has become a recognized and accepted process which everyone look forward to periodically. It is intended to involve all qualified adults in picking their next leaders. The sense is that once everyone is involved, then the majority will be pleased with the government. However, as much as there has been good governance through democracy, there have also been some unintended consequences too. These consequences can be seen by examining the latent function of our democracy. Today, one can hardly watch TV or listen to the radio without seeing or hearing the fracture that exists in the political system of our country. Citizens have been divided into two or more groups based on their party affiliations. The divide is so obvious that parties are not willing to compromise on any issue. The result is a stagnant government, and no reasonable policies have been passed into law. It is hard to know if this fraction is recognized but we surely know that it is unintended.

A democracy is a system of government by the majority of the population or all the eligible members of a state, which is mainly through elected representatives. Citizens or elect representatives have the power to take it upon themselves to from a governing body, such as a parliament. Democracy is not working as originally intended. In the past, women, African Americans, and Native Americans could not vote, only white males could. The president was actually supposed to be chosen by men of the Electoral College, which is the people representing the states of the US, who formally cast votes for the election of the president and vice president. Not by the Electoral College approving the will of the people. Senators were supposed to be appointed

All of these features of a regime, if disrupted or altered, could be the difference between a stable democracy and it demonstrating a radical archetype of ascendancy. After explaining both alternatives, Mainwaring comes to the conclusion that “Presidentialism and a fractionalized multi party system seems especially inimical to stable democracy” in that they are conducive to gridlock between the executive and legislative branches of government. (Mainwaring, p. 168)

Democracy is a unique type of government, and the purpose of this essay is to illustrate the strengths and weaknesses that a democratic government provides. I will detail that many components of this type of society are both strengths and weakness as each component has beneficial aspects as well as unavoidable pitfalls.

Throughout the course of history, mankind has been recorded to corrupt itself. Men have grown tired of simply surviving; they have had to take and conquer others. Absolute monarchies control wealth, land, and even lives of men. The conditions of the people were solely dependent on the conditions of the one who was in power in that particular place and time. History has proven that most men rule unwisely in their kingdoms. To avoid tyrannical rule, some make an attempt to set up a government in which the people ruled themselves. This form of government is called a democracy, or “rule of the people.” History has also revealed through the Greeks and the French Revolution, that a democracy that gives complete power

Aristotle says that justice is thought of as equality among all, there is a disregard to merit (p.172). In a society, there is usually more poor people and because there is this demand of equality then the majority rule (p.174). Mob rule is then authoritative. All governments have their forms, which are good and are bad. Democracy to Aristotle is not the best regime because it is ruled by the poor or the ones that need from the government. Government is not chosen by those who pursue virtue, but instead pursue wealth. The democratic principle is that of freedom, wealth, and birth. Not virtue. He believes the best regime would not be exactly a democracy but a polity that would be a combination of freedom, wealth, birth and virtue. The best regime has ideal conditions in which it becomes a predictable regime and consists of values, choices, the inanimate, elements of the class of workers, and the education of rulers. Democracy has a big defect in that it does not have intelligence or wisdom. It is the rule of many. It is based on the idea of happiness by following pleasures (p.48). Democracy comes into play when the majority revolt against the oligarchy because of the ideas of freedom. The problem with it is that people are pursuing their pleasures, not thinking of the state as a whole. There is unity based on pleasure. Before long, everyone is pursuing their own pleasures and there is an undermining of authority

Schedler argues that authoritarian regimes – particularly since the end of the Cold War era have been replaced by electoral authoritarian regimes that combine the façade of electoral democracy with systemic abuse of democratic procedures. They have reproduced institutional arrangements present in the democratic system, such as elections, the legislative and judicial powers, and independent local governments. However, these institution creations are never meant to become autonomous, rather manipulative in order to be instruments of pretentious delegation of power from the executive.

Have you ever complained or head someone complain about the government? Winston Churchill said “Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of Government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.” In this quote Churchill is saying that there is no perfect government. He is also saying that out of all of them democracy is the best. Today many people in America complain about the government, but it could be worse. Running America as a democracy is the best way compared to other countries’ forms of government.

Democratic consolidation has failed to occur in many Third Wave democracies. Many authoritarian incumbents initiated transitions with the purpose of sustaining autocratic rule through partial liberalization, often exploiting the advantages of office to marginalize oppositions. Many transitions resulted in what Levitsky & Way (2010) called competitive authoritarian regimes and others labeled illiberal democracies (Diamond 2009; Zakaria, 1997, 2007) or semiauthoritarian (Ottaway, 2003), electoral authoritarian (Schedler, 2002, 2009), and hybrid (Diamond, 2002) regimes. These governments held elections and tolerated a limited opposition, but only within narrowly constrained political spaces defined by the incumbents (2016: 126).

Additionally, in more precarious democratic governments such as India’s, peoples right to power is still recognized. Ronojoy Sen remarks of India’s 2009 elections that, “a handful of successful professionals and entrepreneurs even ran”(cite). Despite implying that only successful peoples were exercising their liberties, elucidated in this article is the potential of any citizen to attain political power, demonstrating true liberal democracy in its purest form. Communism does not give its people these liberties, the party is the “agent for creating political development” (Janos, pg. 2) and there is little need for elections as the outcome is pre-determined. In the case of Nazism, while Hitler utilised democracy to attain power, once in control democracy was replaced with autocracy.

In order for humanity to live in peace, avoiding constant chaos, a form of government is necessary to place the greater good above the interests of the individuals. Far too often does the government take hold of power evolving into a type of tyranny. The one exclusion to the countless forms of tyrannical governments is Democracy. Its sole purpose being to protect the general will of the people and allow each individual the opportunity to express themselves.The minority is able to have a voice just as loud as the majority in a lot of ways. It keeps the people happy and free within their own private sphere’s and has put into place a lasting social contract, one that has survived hundreds of years. Democracy is the superior system of government that allows its citizens many freedoms that are not allowed in other systems of government. The power of the people is what gives Democracy the ability to govern, any other power placement cannot be defined as a Democracy.

As the most widely adopted form of democratic government there are many strengths associated with a parliamentary government. The parliamentary system is often praised for the fast and efficient way in which it is able to pass legislation. The reason this is possible is because unlike a presidential system the legislative and executive power in a parliamentary system are merged together. Due to this fusion of power legislation does not have to undergo a lengthy process and therefore laws can be formulated and put into place much quicker(Bates, 1986: 114-5). Another advantage of a parliamentary system is that the majority of the power is not held by one individual head of state but rather is more evenly divided among a single party or coalition. One of the main benefits of this is that as there is more of a division of power a parliamentary government is less prone to authoritarianism than a presidential system. Juan Linz argues that a presidential system is more dangerous due to the fact that; “Winners and losers are sharply defined for the entire period of the presidential mandate”(Linz, 1990: 56), this sharp line between winners and losers increases tension between these two groups and allows the winner to isolate themselves from other political parties (Linz, 1990: 56). Due to this tension and isolation a presidential system is at a higher risk of turning into an authoritarian regime than a parliamentary system.

It has been said by Sir Winston Churchill that democracy is the worst form of government except all the others that have been tried. In other words, democracy is the best form of government for now. But he also implied, that democracy itself is not flawless, it is only better than all the other political forms. In fact, there are a lot of problems that democracy is not able to fix. For example, the balance and the efficiency of government of the state is the most debatable one. Democracy means that a government is “made of the people, by the people and for the people”. People’s choices and opinions need to be represented, or else the existence of democratic institutions will be meaningless. But one cannot burn the candle at both ends. One could only achieve full representations at the expense of efficiency. Thus, at what extend to make a choice between representation and efficiency becomes an obstacle for every democratic government. I personally believe, that the best political form we can have so far is the democratic institutions of the United States: Presidential regime type, SMDP electoral system, pluralist for interest group representation and federal constitutions

In deciding which government is best, autocracy or democracy, one must first define their understanding of “best.” Should one be looking for structure, order, or longevity, then a reasonable response would be some variation of autocracy. However, if one is looking for a form of government which maximizes involvement from the general public and is flexible, then democracy may be a better option. Both autocracy and democracy style governments can be divided into further subcategories, such as a constitutional monarchy or modern-authoritarian autocracy, and all of the options will be considered, analyzed, and understood in terms what they are best for. To create a framework for the discussion, “Why We Shouldn’t Judge a Country by Its GDP” by Michael Green (2015) and Economist article “What’s Gone Wrong with Democracy” (2014) will be summarized and used to compare Russia, China, Germany, and the United Kingdom. Relevant terms, such as modernization, legitimacy, and consent, will be intertwined with the discussions of forms of government to understand how governmental structures operate in relation to people. In conclusion, I will argue that the best form of government is a federal parliamentary republic.

Democracy, typically through elected representatives, is a “government of the people, by the people, for the people”, as once stated by former U.S President Abraham Lincoln. It is true that visionary leaders in an autocratic regime can accomplish much, such as introducing government policies quickly without legislative and judicial constraints. However, a democracy is always the best form of government. To address this aim, I will be doing an analysis of how democracies use the liberation of personal freedoms to protect citizens from the possibility of living an interminable amount of time in a self-interested regime.