any other than the current one...
a non-communist democratic party rule would be better...
2007-11-19 21:22:23
·
answer #1
·
answered by Harish Jharia 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
All the government are good to rule India. The only need is for the people to wake up. People should not just sit and watch the misdeeds of the political parties. We the people of India sit in our bedroom watch news and accuse political parties. Why don't make any effort to correct them? For instance, on a traffic signal a traffic constable stops a bike rider. Bike rider is without license. Bike rider will give 100-200 INR and go his way. He would not take pain to go to the court and pay fine or ask Constable for the receipt. But for the bike rider as well as the constable bribe is beneficial. Who is wrong? Government, constable or the bike rider? We should stop accusing the political parties but try to correct the system.
2007-11-22 12:17:28
·
answer #2
·
answered by MS - Believe in Ek Oankaar 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Over the long run, democracy is not always a good thing especially when it's citizens become overly dependant on the government for handouts or raid the treasury...a benevolent monarchy can sometimes be better but does not always give people a choice in their destiny and can turn into an aristocracy that abuses common peoples rights. A moral republic seems to be the best as long as moral codes are foundational. Ultimately, no form of government is perfect without the direct involvement and cooperation of it's citizens as well as a strong moral code. Democracy can offer that to it's people and give them the ability to throw off any corruption or government that is not in keeping with the desires of it's people....however, majority rule can be a danger as well....strong leadership is required.
An essay on America...............
How Long Do We Have?
About the time our original thirteen states adopted their new constitution in 1787, Alexander Tyler, a Scottish history professor at the University of Edinburgh, had this to say about the fall of the Athenian Republic some 2,000 years earlier:
"A democracy is always temporary in nature; it simply cannot exist as a permanent form of government."
"A democracy will continue to exist up until the time that voters discover they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury."
"From that moment on, the majority always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally collapse due to loose fiscal policy, which is always followed by a dictatorship."
"The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the beginning of history, has been about 200 years"
"During those 200 years, those nations always progressed through the following sequence:
1. from bondage to spiritual faith;
2. from spiritual faith to great courage;
3. from courage to liberty;
4. from liberty to abundance;
5. from abundance to complacency;
6. from complacency to apathy;
7. from apathy to dependence;
8. from dependence back into bondage"
2007-11-20 06:54:22
·
answer #3
·
answered by paul h 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
In the U.S. a democracy is hands down the best. But only when you have true representatives, which i don't feel we have. It basically a dictatorship just with a lot more people running the place. The citizens are supposed to at the very least have a say, and we have none.
In other societies different forms of government work better.
2007-11-20 06:57:54
·
answer #4
·
answered by Beensaved 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
At the moment we need a dictatorial gorm of Government to set things right in India if this is the country you are talking about. Democracy has failed in India totally as of now.
2007-11-21 06:30:19
·
answer #5
·
answered by crewsaid 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
I will assume you are talking about Australia because of the impending election on Saturday.
It's a hard decision for me. I'm not making my decision based on age or looks. Unfortunately a lot of people do (like most of my friends and family). This irriates me because people elect a party into government without knowing their policies, then whinge about how terrible the government is.
I asked my mother who she was voting for and she said Kevin Rudd. I asked her why and what policies she agreed with and she couldn't name them.
I think if you're going to vote you need to a) know who you are voting for and what policies they will implement, how they will affect you, etc and b) tell people who you're voting for, not say 'that's a rude question' (my mother always tells me it's rude). if you are going to vote for this person to be the next leader of the country, i think you need to stand up and say who you are voting for and why.
Now to Kevin Rudd and John Howard, pros and cons for each:
Kevin:
Pros - Fresh outlook on the country's future. Speaks chinese, which can help improve relations with China. Abolishing workplace agreements (good for those who want them gone). Improved broadband system. Female as deputy PM. Money spent on tax cuts, education and health. Keeps Peter Costello out of parliament.
Cons- Labour governments have bad history with debt and interest rates (17% Hawke Labour Government). Big risk when our country is doing well economically to bring in a new leader. Some people don't want AWAs abolished.
John:
Pros- Proven to be effectively handling the economy. Even with interest rate rises, they are still low compared to Hawke's 17% (and NZ's interest rate is currently around 10%, under a labour government there). Keeping AWAs. Good relationship with America.
Cons- He will retire during the term and hand over to Peter Costello, who many people (myself included) can't stand. Threat of interest rates rising higher. Some say he is getting too old (he is around 70). Many want AWAs abolished. Need to improve relations with Asia, not America.
Thank God I'm too young to vote this year! I couldn't decide!
Whoever you do decide to vote for, make sure it's an informed decision. We are lucky enough to live in a country that has fair democracy, and it's important that we use it properly and don't take it for granted.
Good luck at the polls on Saturday!
2007-11-20 07:23:19
·
answer #6
·
answered by emmybob3 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
A Non Islamic democracy
2007-11-21 01:34:05
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
A national Government under leadership of Dr.Abdul Kalam our former president will be the best for ruling our country.
He is honest, unmarried and has no siblings.
2007-11-20 07:11:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by svkchari 1
·
0⤊
1⤋
no government can rule our country in a better way .
so lets join together and strt a new clean government no culprit nothing .howz........this idea
2007-11-22 00:13:19
·
answer #9
·
answered by zia 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
democracy is a good choice as people can question d govt. on any matter however non democratic govt. helps a country 2 develop quickly as it is stable no elections r held d govt. can only b overthrown by a revolution organized by d people but in a democracy people can change d govt. if they want to in d elections held after every 5 yrs.......................
i gave u all d details...............................
according 2 me democracy is d best.............
its your turn now.....................
u decide
2007-11-22 07:27:58
·
answer #10
·
answered by Cutiepie 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
RSS
Shiv sena
BJP
Hindutva
VHP
Bajrang Dal
Hindu Unity
God bless these Hindu parties
2007-11-20 09:21:17
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋