Although many people believe that democracy is the best and successful form of the government. However History tells us that many times Dictatorship has proven to be successful. For example in France( when lead by a dictator Napoleon) and in Germany (when lead by Hitler) . Dictatorship also has proven to be successful in Pakistan. Dictatorship is much more effective way of running a government as it establishes peace, and has less room for the corruption. It provides economic stability to a country. Moreover Dictatorship is much flexible than that of democracy. P Pakistan is better of being ruled by dictatorship than that of democracy. Although in democracy people have a right to choose their representatives but when you consider a country like Pakistan about 43% of the people are illiterate so they are not qualified enough to choose their representatives. They do not understand the economical and political issues. On the other hand dictators are not elected by the people. In democratic country like Pakistan there is a lot of political violence which leads to the disruption of the peace. On the other hand in dictatorship one person or a small group of people have absolute power resulting in no political violence. In Pakistan people want peace and this can be achieved through dictatorship. In many countries dictatorship is successful then democracy. I...
... middle of paper ...
... Shah, Haider Ali. "Democracy Vs Dictatorship: Pakistan's Economic Perspective."Democracy Vs Dictatorship: Pakistan's Economic Perspective. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. http://www.slideshare.net/haideralishah/democracy-vs-dictatorship-pakistans-economic-perspective
Anonymous. "Benefits Of Dictatorship | Benefits Of." Benefits Of Dictatorship. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. http://benefitof.net/benefits-of-dictatorship/
Ali, Hassan. "Pakistan Today." Pakistan Today. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2014. http://www.pakistantoday.com.pk/2011/01/20/comment/editors-mail/poverty-in-pakistan/
Naeem, Hamza. "Democracy Vs Dictatorship: Pakistan's Economic Perspective." Democracy Vs Dictatorship: Pakistan's Economic Perspective. N.p., n.d. Web. 17 Mar. 2014.
http://www.slideshare.net/hamzanaeem161/democracy-and-dictatorship
Reich, R. (2007). How capitalism is killing democracy. Foreign Policy, Sep/Oct2007, 38-42. Retrieved from Academic Search Complete.
Democracy is control by the people. On the surface, this appears to be a superior form, but as Plato warned it is slow to react, oppresses of the minority, and lacks skilled leaders (Perry,
Citizens don’t play a role in politics so they are left with not much to worry about. Lary Eastland from Washington Times says, “Democracy is messy,” (Eastland). Democracy is slow, democracy is un-accountable, and democracy is messy. This is due to the checks and balances system which provides additional security and power balances but also slows down the decision making process. Democracy is unorganized slow and it also favors the majority in elections and other matters that involve citizen vote. While an absolute monarch may be fast, quick and easy, it doesn't mean that it is quality. Democracy isn't a cheap plug-and-play government system. It requires time and patience for it to operate and run a functional country. Democracy may take longer, and it may feel messy but it's one small cost for decisions that are worthwhile. It allows decisions to be accepted by the people and not forced upon them. This, in turn, lets people live a happy life knowing that the government knows what's it's doing and they don't have to worry about what scary thing the president might do next. Democracy is a compromise, and most of the time a slow one. However, a compromise is superior to a forced
A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves largesse from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury, with the result
Many countries have decided against having a totalitarian government system, but there still are countries that continue with running their country with authoritarianism. The Middle East persists on having an authoritarianism style government over having a democracy. Theories that prove to be true to Middle Eastern people of how a totalitarian government is better relate to economics, religion, and international involvement. People living in the Middle East want to avoid having political liberation because that can lead to a consistent and stable democratic government. Another reason keeping them from changing is that since their countries aren’t struggling economically, the citizens don’t see it necessary to elect new leaders. The countries in the Middle East region decide to continue with authoritarianism because the fear and pain is greater than the feeling of freedom.
177-192 Street, P. Capitalism and Democracy "Don't Mix Very Well": Reflections on globalization, February, 2000. Z online Magazine: http://www.iefd.org/articles/capitalism_and_democracy.php UNDP (2004), Arab Human Development Report 2004: Towards Freedom in the Arab World . Pp. 12
Many authors argue that capitalism and democracy are always complimentary, and go hand in hand, it is impossible to imagine one without other. All these arguments do not match with reality. Capitalism and democracy can clash in different fields (Delanty, 2012).
There have been enormous efforts to spread democracy as a political system throughout the world by the developed democratic countries and the international development organizations including the World Bank. By the late 1990s the United States alone spent over a half billion dollars to promote democratic expansion throughout the world (Diamond, 2003). These were done considering that the democratic system leads towards development. As a result in the late 20th century we saw a huge political transformation towards democracy. During the last few decades a huge number of countries adopted democracy as their political system. However, it retain a big question how far democracy is successful in bringing development of a country? At this stage, some people also criticizes the effort of democratization arguing that it is done without considering the context of a country, sometimes democracy is not ideal for all countries and it is an effort to extinct diversity of political system. In studying the literature regarding the debate, we found a paradoxical relationship between democracy and development. Some argue that democracy has failed to ensure expected outcomes in terms of development. While others confronted that democracy has a considerable impact on development. Another group of people argue that form of political system actually does not have any impact on development process. On the verge of these debates, some development institutions and academics throw light on why democracy is not working properly, and what measure should be taken to make it more successful in bringing effective development of developing countries. Consequently, this writing is an effort of revisiting the different views about impact of democra...
a few ways a dictatorship has advantages over democracy it's more efficient. A dictatorship is a
Firstly, K. Isbester mentions that democracy has a different meaning for everyone, as some can define democracy as a good aspect for development, on the contrary other believe that it is nothing more than voting after several years. Although, Latin America see democratic g...
Democracy is not bad or harmful but we must be careful when talking about democracy, whether we actually mean giving power to people to or making those in power more representatives of the people views. Because it all up to us as individuals to how we are using our democracy that gone reflect whether it’s the worst or best form of government. Through democracy we can either build or break our country to how we responded to the situations going on around us, if we stand together and fight for our democracy that we were told about or we sit down and relax watch other people using our democracy to their own good
...a voice and a choice. They have the feeling of being secure and free something which is only achieved through national security. Democracies also share similar beliefs and political ideologies which prevent them from engaging in warfare in the event of an arising conflict. The democratic peace theory states that democratic countries do not engage in interstate wars against each other. This theory has been proven true from time and time again in history. There has never been a case of an independent democratic country raging war on another democratic regime. So definitely when it comes to solving conflict through war regime type does matter since democratic states are 99 percent less likely to engage in a fight with autocracies and 100 prevent less likely to declare war on fellow democracy. Democracy is a preventer of conflict on all levels of human interactions.
Since the initiation of the Millennium Development Goals in 2000, securing democratic freedoms in developing countries has become a major global-political concern. As a result, various donor nations have implemented good governance conditionalities in their financial aid policies, emphasising the establishment of fair democratic elections in recipient countries. However, efforts to reinforce legitimate democratic governments in developing states have been largely unsuccessful. In the book Wars, Guns, and Votes: Democracy in Dangerous Places, economist Paul Collier examines how the international community’s obsession with democracy and elections has hindered the developmental process in what he has termed as the bottom billion countries. By employing economic methods of analysis, Collier demonstrates how current international development polices have exacerbated rather than diminished existing issues impeding reconstruction efforts in low-income states. In order to help remedy the harmful effects of these policies, Collier proposes several innovative solutions he believes would better support political and economic development in bottom billion countries. However, Wars, Guns, and Votes is not without its limitations. Although Collier offers a new economic perspective to topics previously dominated by other social sciences, he fails to define key concepts relevant to his argument. Furthermore, Collier’s writing style is extremely convoluted. Therefore, one can see that although Wars, Guns, and Votes provides a new economic based approach to development, the book is limited in terms of comprehensiveness and accessibility.
Pakistan is the basis in the international fight against terrorism to this day. Many Pakistani terrorist groups have made many terrorist attacks around the world. Pakistan faced the choice siding with or staying against the United States during the aftermath of 9/11. Violence in Pakistan has increased for many years as terrorist groups have targeted many political leaders, tribal leaders, the military, and also schools. Pakistan is divided into people who see the country as modern and/o...
A democracy could only survive if people voice their opinions, ask questions, and if the society is educated. Disobedience leads to some of the most unfortunate of things, such as death. People either believe that the above information is 100 % spot on, while others believe none of it is true. Part of this is because people come from different places in the world and have many different opinions. The opinions may be about what allows a democracy to survive and why some of the most terrible things happen. A democracy is only one of the forms of government that allow a society to survive, whether or not it is the best one.