Democracy creates stability in society

Democracy creates stability in society

Democracy, a system of governing a country or multiple states where there the country is actually is a federation of states, is a rather popular system in use by the world’s countries today. It is widely recognised and sought after as the form of ideal government for a new country, as it is recognised as the best form of government compared to others. Many kinds of democracies exist, some of which are representative democracy, parliamentary democracy, liberal democracy and direct democracy.

Democracy entrusts the power of the ruling of the country into the people. Representative democracy is probably the most commonly practised in the world today, which countries such as the US, Singapore, Australia and European countries are using. In a representative democracy, the people in the country usually vote for the people they want to form the new government, and then the person for whom the majority voted for would be in the Parliament. In Singapore, the country is divided into districts, which are usually governed by an individual or a team of up to 6.

Stability is a key area of concern for many countries, particularly countries where there is a limited natural resource available, or to developing or new countries. In the area of this essay, stability shall be defined as able to survive even when there are adverse changes in the country’s and the global economy, social stability (no riots), and steady improvement in terms of living conditions, life expectancy and the norm. Equality between all the people and good social stability is key to a country’s stability as well.

Firstly, democracy creates a sense of equality in a society. There might be certain minority groups or under-privileged people in any aspect, and therefore by having a representative democracy, the people are able to choose their own leaders. Therefore, the people feel that they are in control equally over their country, as they have a sense of “power” in terms of choosing in which direction the country is heading. In the case of a multi-racial society, the minority groups would actually be represented in the government, as is the case of Singapore, where the majority Chinese and the minority Malays and Indians are represented as well in the government.

Secondly, democracy is a drastically much more peaceful way of choosing a government compared to, for example, a revolt, overthrow, or military coupe. This is because the government is being chosen by the people themselves, and is therefore a choice of the majority. If an attempt to win power, was made through say, a revolt or a mass bloodshed involving the existing government, chaos would ensue and the resulting carnage could permanently affect the country’s progress. Furthermore, as the government being picked represents the majority view of the country, the people would agree to the government and not protest against its election.

Thirdly, a democratic country, and the resulting elected government, would be, for lack of a better word, be able to “rule” the country properly. As the elected government was chosen by the majority of the people themselves, the majority of the country would trust in the government and not oppose or protest against most, or even any rulings made. This case of trust in the government would lead to the government ruling the country well, which would therefore ensure the continued progress and growth of the country as a whole in terms of its social, economic and political status.

However, there are disadvantages with a democracy. In this case, as the democratically elected government represents the view of the majority community, there will be the people who voted for those who were not elected. These people would be dissatisfied with the government and may want to revolt or protest against many of the things that the new government would bring up. Furthermore, every representative democracy has a minority; in fact every society in existence has a minority. These would be the people whose wishes and choices for the government were not realised. These people would be disadvantaged and angry, and could potentially cause trouble.

Secondly, another problem with a democracy is that the voters may be deceived. A classic example would be Hitler, who promised, among others, success and probably enticing stuff that convinced his countrymen to vote for him. But as a great leader, after being voted, Hitler didn’t fulfil his promises, instead using his position of power to express his personal hatred, and he ultimate achieved his innate desire of the killing of the Jews, which while wasn’t successful, result in the bloodshed of 6 million or so innocent Jews. Leaders such as these may be voted anytime into the government, provided their election campaign is enticing enough. This could pose problematic for the society.

Despite the above disadvantages, however, I feel that a democracy creates stability in society. The advantages outweigh the disadvantages, and the disadvantages themselves rarely occur. For example there has only been one Hitler, a circumstance which proves that the scenario is unlikely to occur again. Furthermore, in most societies, the minority have not revolted but have simply submitted to the usually good ruling of the elected government. This therefore convinces me that democracy creates stability in society.