It is often said that democracy is the best form used to choose a government and affect the policies that it brings forth, for the simple reason that it is chosen by the people and is "for the people". It gives people a voice in what a government should do, but does not always yield successful results. Democracy may not be entirely "representative" of a group of people, but at least it's better than other forms of government, like fascism...
But can it be just as bad?
Think of it this way: a democratic election process leads to a party being chosen as the majority in the parliament of a certain state. It is also assumed that the government itself is "representative" of the people in that whatever decision it makes is also a decision "made by the people". Therefore, every policy implemented by the state is also implemented by the people... supposedly, that is.
Let's assume that a policy suddenly came out which was not approved by a good portion of the populace. In protest, they criticize the policy implemented by the state. However, it is often argued, especially in Stalin's USSR and modern-day Amerika, that criticizing the policies of a state also means criticizing the people who voted for that policy and thus criticizing the state as a whole. At its essence, this is totalitarianism, and thus shuts out any valid criticism for the policies of a state.
Such an assumption is by definition wrong. A government may choose to listen to its populace regarding the implementation of a certain populace... or not. Moreover, when it comes to voting, it is wrong to assume that every single citizen has gone out to vote; in many case, voter turnout is more often than not less than 50% of the entire state population. Furthermore, it is asinine to say that criticizing someone's actions means criticizing that certain someone because of who he or she is; the same can be applied to a state in this case.
Democracy may not be a perfect form of government, but at least it gives the people a voice. I suggest a government that fears its people every step of the way, instead of a government that subjects its populace to fear. Keep them in line, and hopefully with constant reform and progression, governments and their "subjects" will maintain good relationships and keep each other in check.
Salaam, from
Saracen
But can it be just as bad?
Think of it this way: a democratic election process leads to a party being chosen as the majority in the parliament of a certain state. It is also assumed that the government itself is "representative" of the people in that whatever decision it makes is also a decision "made by the people". Therefore, every policy implemented by the state is also implemented by the people... supposedly, that is.
Let's assume that a policy suddenly came out which was not approved by a good portion of the populace. In protest, they criticize the policy implemented by the state. However, it is often argued, especially in Stalin's USSR and modern-day Amerika, that criticizing the policies of a state also means criticizing the people who voted for that policy and thus criticizing the state as a whole. At its essence, this is totalitarianism, and thus shuts out any valid criticism for the policies of a state.
Such an assumption is by definition wrong. A government may choose to listen to its populace regarding the implementation of a certain populace... or not. Moreover, when it comes to voting, it is wrong to assume that every single citizen has gone out to vote; in many case, voter turnout is more often than not less than 50% of the entire state population. Furthermore, it is asinine to say that criticizing someone's actions means criticizing that certain someone because of who he or she is; the same can be applied to a state in this case.
Democracy may not be a perfect form of government, but at least it gives the people a voice. I suggest a government that fears its people every step of the way, instead of a government that subjects its populace to fear. Keep them in line, and hopefully with constant reform and progression, governments and their "subjects" will maintain good relationships and keep each other in check.
Salaam, from
Saracen
Comments
Post a Comment