2006-11-05 17:12:09 · 13 answers · asked by jagabandhu_sabat 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Since democracy is failing in the United States, I cannot suggest that anyone else try it. If we can put it back together here, then maybe it can be recommended to others. It is a most difficult system to try, needing the sincere backing of the vast majority of the population, and something like a constitution that will balance the powers of society so that no one group may dominate. If one groups dominates, then it will fail for sure. If your country has power concentrated in the hands of a few super rich who control banking, the press, and perhaps the religion, democracy will last as long as ice in the hot sun. It is a wonderful idea, but it needs constant care to keep it alive.
2006-11-05 17:33:58 · answer #1 · answered by michaelsan 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
since the beginning of the 20th century countries world over have seen changes in form of governence , that is monarchies , communism , autocracy etc but the stability and devlopment which has been provided by democracy is far beyond comparision .
Everybody in this country complains about governence so hence and so forth b'coz they have not seen any other form of rule, and guess the day they do they will realize the importance of democracy .
2006-11-05 17:32:54 · answer #2 · answered by skymztr 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
*sigh* People are SO ignorant of history.
The United States is not a democracy. Our founding fathers FEARED democracy. It is a REPUBLIC. A democracy is direct rule by the people, and very soon descends into anarchy. A Republic is indirect rule by the people through elected officials.
IE, a set of candidates campains for the chance to represent their state. The state must then choose, through a majority vote, which candidate they feel most accurately represents them. The candidate then becomes a lawmaker.
2006-11-05 17:15:29 · answer #3 · answered by Firestorm 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well, if your country is the USA, absolutely. I'm not one to believe in Divine Inspiration but the Constitution is the most remarkable document for the framework of a government ever created. And it was written more than 200 years ago. It set a 3 branch system, each system independent and each with a specific duty. It set up protections for citizens and their rights were made into law. It allowed for amendments as the Founding Fathers knew theirs was not a perfect instrument and changes and tweaking of the laws may be needed. And they made it tough to amend the Constitution so frivolous or political driven amendments would have to go through an arduous process to be enshrined in law.
Often we complain about our Constitutional rights, want to add stuff (abortion limitations, ERA, flag burning bans), complain about gun control or defendant's rights but just think of the simple beauty of a document that allows us to flesh this stuff out.
So again, yes.
2006-11-05 18:50:56 · answer #4 · answered by iwasnotanazipolka 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
this question is delayed by 70 years. It is too late even if we decide, it is not good for us. You cannot change a constitution overnight, it will take another 25 years to start motivating a debate
and mandate, to just get the process of KNOWING, WHAT IS..
started, and another 25 years to begin paper work, and another 25 years to implement the process. So, whether we like it or not, we have DECMOCRACY, and why not, it is only in a democratic state, that there is TRANSPARENCY, in everything you do, Freedom of speech. In a non democratic government, like in Africa, YOU DARE NOT EVEN SPEAK OUT AGAINST THE RULE.. But in America, India, you can do so, openly. But then again, in All places of the world there is a secret protective MAFIA.
2006-11-08 23:07:02 · answer #5 · answered by raseema 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, and I'm surprised that it "worked" in the US. I think developing nations need more control exerted over them, or the will fracture along lines of race, religion, color, etc., like so many African countries have.
2006-11-05 17:20:04 · answer #6 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 0⤊ 1⤋
It has served us well for over 200 years. I'd say it's suitable.
2006-11-05 17:16:38 · answer #7 · answered by yupchagee 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
We are not a democracy. it is manipulated autocracy of Nehru dynasty.
2006-11-08 02:12:57 · answer #8 · answered by Brahmanda 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No.We need Communism in few states and Monarchy in few other.Democracy is resulting in to very very costly and ineffective manner of governance.
2006-11-05 17:15:11 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
not really because everybody has an idea of their own and we really need to focus on one strategy. china is communist and look how prosperous and peaceful they are. communism never hurt anybody, it's the people that don't want it
2006-11-05 17:15:54 · answer #10 · answered by id_ram 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋