Strong dictatorship vs weak democracy

As a principal, however, this political philosophy should have some strong roots in our society after the passage of almost one decade but, very unfortunately, our democracy has been surrounded by too many undemocratic democrats.

This was an evolutionary process that took many years.

fragile democracy is better than strong dictatorship

Democracy is never as efficient as dictatorship. Dictatorships are pretty unlikely to remain benevolent, so democracy is the tie on power that protects the people.

strong dictatorship or fragile democracy which is better

This is because a strong dictator can put an end to squabbles and enable progress by taking quick decisions and enforcing discipline and order in the system. When the people are free to work as they see fit, they will have more opportunity to make overall improvements to all of society.

It even convinced Brutus to kill his beloved friend, Caesar, the dictator. Hitler seized power and wreaked havoc in Germany and the world in WW2.

advantages of dictatorship over democracy

But this process has finally made them established democracies. It resulting in a productive based society triggering the continues economic growth showed in the last years.

The economic tigers of the were the dictatorships of South Korea, Taiwan and Singapore.

A good dictatorship is better than a bad democracy

Whatever relevant examples put regarding the success of any dictatorship can only be accredited to the expert behind those policies and not because of the form of government. Last but not least it would be the problem of the efficiency. We see how determined dictatorship is to the population. Wrongdoers cannot go unpunished. Add to this ability a power to endure in an intelligently chosen course in the face of distraction, confusion, and difficulty, and you have the essence of discipline. Supported by Basque nationalists, and other separatist movements, they seized power. The example given shows the evidence of the consent of citizen toward the repression, but do not necessarily mean that Singapore is controlled by dictatorship. They can differ on the magnitude of the governing clique, the military or civil nature of the authority, economic liberties granted for citizens, legality of political associations, legal framework, etc. Now, as we claim to be an independent and free country, shoudn't we value the intellect and wisdom more than memory? We should see that the economy of China on its classical age had slow growth. But we were further appalled upon reading the arguments the opposition team during their second speech, since not one the examples of dictatorships they provided out of their own free will and initiative that is, without the proposition first presenting that example met their own definition. No consensus in fragile democracy In a dictatorship, there are no riots against the government or its affiliates, a single party is more likely in power, the ruler has unlimited power, plans are executed efficiently and in a fashion manner, most efficient during emergencies, and less room for corruption. Democracy evolves into kleptocracy. On the other hand, highly unequal societies are a breeding ground for revolution as the pressure comes for better redistribution. They base this on the argument that voters are irrational, among other things.
Rated 10/10 based on 58 review
Dictatorship Is the Best Path to Development