hey! disadvantages of democracy???

Question

i am taking part in a debate about democracy and i got to argue against democratic government..
so could u giv me some disadvantages of democratic govt??
that is point which i can put forth to establish myself against democracy???

thnx!!!!!!!!

Answer 1

The first and most obvious problem is: 50% of the people are less-then-average in intelligence.

Also, the decisionmaking-by-committee usually takes forever. The more people that have a say in a matter, the longer it takes to decide - unless done by a straightforward vote or referendum, and even then most places have well-oiled mechanisms of appeal. American judiciary system is an example, with 12-person vote (a decision which can take quite some time by itself to reach, see the movie Twelve Angry Men for an interesting example), which can then be appealed to, taking the matter to some other group which will deliberate and vote on it again (after another lengthy exposition of facts, to insure the informed decision).

Speaking of which, the best decision is an informed decision. However, you have no proof that the source(s) from which you are getting your information are anywhere near objective. And that is if a person even cares enough to get informed. Many people just think of it all as Not Their Problem.

Mob mentality - "im votin fer XYZ, coz evrybody i no is gonna vote fer them, so they gotta be doin sumpn good!"

Most democracies in the world today are representative democracies, not true (direct) democracies. Although direct democracies also have their (big) problems (see above), representative democracies are much more susceptible to corruption, empty talk and false promises. Even to the point where there is "public knowledge" that "all politicians are, by definition, dirty". In such a situation, people are even discouraged of voting, reasoning that either it's futile and the really bad ones will get the vote anyway, or that they are not picking the best candidate, but the lesser evil.

Another problem is that people that would be most qualified to wield power are usually least inclined to do so. It is similar to the common saying "Those who can't do, teach. Those who can't teach, criticise". The worst candidate for a position of power is he who wants to be in a position of power.

In my opinion, despotism by an altruistic and intelligent leader would be the best form of government - but 1) where to find such a person? 2) how to make him do it? and 3) how to get past the objections of the lesser men? Some of such rare people number the current Dalai Lama and Mahatma Gandhi among them. The list is very very short.

Democracy is really bad. But, admittedly, it's the least bad thing we've found so far.

Also, do read the Wikipedia entry - I am sure you can find more ammo if you think a bit about the info there.

Answer 2

One big flaw in Democracy is that elected officials are most concerned about protecting their jobs, not doing what is right or necessary. For this reason, no politician wants to take a tough stance on immigration. For example, let's say there is a heavy Hispanic vote in someone's state. He politicians fears that, should the immigrants later be granted amnesty, his constituents will vote him out of office.

We never make any progress in finding alternatives to oil because Big Oil makes sure no legislation or funding ever gets approved. No politician has any incentive to make the tough decisions a country requires.

Even education is a problem. Bush certainly didn't push through the "No Child Left Behind" bill to become popular. He immediately lost 90% of the teachers votes. However, it was a necessary reform, and one of the very few that managed to get passed. However, if he did not have such a majority in Congress at that time, even that bill would have been doomed to failure.

Another disadvantage of democracy is the current trend of having to be so Politically Correct. For example, Martin Luther King Day (MLK Day) should never have been approved. Besides Christmas and George Washington's birthday (which was then lumped together with Abraham Lincoln's birthday and then demoted to the generic "Presidents Day"), no single person has ever been deemed worthy of such an honor. If you read up on MLK, you will discover he was a renound abuser of women, and had developed some unsavory ties with Communist factions. This is not the same guy you see in the suit and starched white shirt. This man was definitely no angel, but the revisionists would like us to believe that. MLK only received the honor because he is black, and politicians were too scared to take a stand due to fear of losing the black vote. See how a travesty is committed by politicians who are afraid to vote their conscience? No one ever offered a JFK day, so don't let anyone fool you that MLK got the honor for being assassinated. Ronald Reagan missed being killed in office, and no one has pushed for a day in his honor.

Another disadvantage of democracy is that everyone can bog down the system with their own petty demands and complaints. When people demonstrate, that now costs a city millions of tax dollars, but people have the right to assemble. People take everyone to court over minor matters, and this strains the legal system. Congress has to consider thousands of bills that are just a grab for money that don't even merit the time it takes to read the request.

Answer 3

There is one major flaw in a democratic system and it is based on simple logic. A democracy separates power into three areas: The Executive, the Legislature and the Judiciary. At risk of over-simplifying, the Executive decides the strategy, the Legislature creates laws and the Judiciary executes those laws. The flaw in the system is very simple: there is no political body charged with removing laws. Thus as a democracy ages it generates more and more laws, and eventually all freedom is extinguished. The entire process takes somewhere around 600 to 1000 years (depending upon how active the legislature and judiciary are). This is the basic reason why older democracies tend to stagnate. You can see it in the number of ridiculous laws that accumulate, and the slow grinding loss of vitality in any older democracy.

Answer 4

1. people vote for candidates that are previously supported and endorsed by their political parties. In other words, the Party chooses and not the people.
2. if a presidential candidate is poor or middle class he/she can never raise the millions of dollars required to run a half-decent campaign. You must be a millionaire to aspire to the presidency.
3. the majority of people do't vote for a candidate's ideas, but other considerations of a more superficial nature. Ideological position are not discussed in depth by the media.
4. a presidential candidate with at least a remote chance of winning has to conform to a series of non-political norms that require: a traditional family life, no evidence of psychological treatment, no extramarital scandals, no minor arrests of the Paris Hilton kind, no wild partying in their youth, etc.
5. voting machines are obsolete and unreliable
6. in cases where results are not definite (as with the 2000 election) the final decision is left to the Supreme Court, an isolationist body not chosen b y popular vote and which does not reflect the people's choice.
7 the best example that democracy is an abstract concept and not a reality is that the US has a President supported by less than 30% of the population who makes unpopular decision, sometimes against the people's interests wishes or judgemnent.

Hope this may help you win the debate.

Answer 5

Idealistically speaking, Democracy's weak point is the lack of a concentration of power. Leadership, and its attendant responsibilities of decision making; when left to the people, demands that the people be articulate, educated, and responsible themselves. The achilles heel in this is when the people begin to become complacent and delegate their authority to others who may or may not have the societies best interest in mind as a whole.

Answer 6

the thing is that if our country is democratic then why would politicians oppose each other...... see pratiba is a very good leader..... abdul kalam is also very good... then why does politicians support pratiba but not kalam and vice versa.... the reason is POLITICS..... so democracy in india is a name sake.... the politicians merely fight for their place....