Democracy or Dictator ship ?

[mwaqar17]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

[covfefe_]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

It's about the motive of the ruler.
And Dictatorship or democracy is just a disguise.
No one can run a country without popular support from its citizens.
The parliamentary democratic system is so corrupt that no good person can rise to the top.

[wRex]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

Democracy
Ideally, the power in a democratic government comes from the people.  Elections are held wherein citizens of a given location (be it country, state, province, town, city, etc.) are able to vote for the candidate whom they feel will best represent their personal wants and needs when in a position of power.  Therefore, the main principle behind democracy is that of representation.  Even though the people themselves are not able to create and enforce laws, there is an expectation that the elected representatives will act on their behalf.

Benefits of a Democracy
Democracy is sometimes said to be the best form of government.  Namely because it derives its power from all of the people, and not just a small group.  This is also part of the reason democracy is thought to be a safeguard against a revolution.  Considering the people in charge were put there by the people themselves, there is less of a need to overthrow the government violently. Freedom is also a huge aspect of democracy.  Freedom of thought, worship, speech and action (assuming it is peaceful and within the limits of established laws) are often the backbone on which the rest of the government is built.  These freedoms enable individuals to grow and pursue their personal dreams and goals.

Dictatarship
a dictatorship is a form of government where the majority, if not all of the power is granted to one individual.  The people being governed have no say in the way they are governed, and are unable to make any changes to the political system.  Whereas democracy thrives on freedom, a dictatorship thrives on oppression.  There are no competitive elections held, so therefore no chance of unseating the dictator.

Benefits of a Dictatorship
As referenced earlier, elections are imperfect things.  While the majority of a population is represented, there is always going to be a portion of the population that is not.  Society is a large and unwieldy thing, and some would argue that trying to apply something as potentially volatile as elections to it is a recipe for disaster. Instead, by giving all of the power to one person, the government can move quickly, and more like a machine.  A dictator is a leader who possesses exceptional talent in the fields of organization, and administration, and is also able to act decisively and without fear of dissenting opinions.

based on above explanation, I prefer Democracy with Realiable Person to be The President.

[illicit]

I choose Democracy because there is an indispensable part of democracy is majority rule, which is carried out by voting. However, unrestricted majority rule poses a threat to the liberty of a population's minority members. All modern democracies operate within a framework of laws that restrict majority rule by guaranteeing all citizens the same rights.

[Blockgraham]

There has been a substitution of concepts above I guess. Probably most of us would prefer democracy, but when it comes to either choosing republic or monarchy opinions split. In that case I'm pretty much satisfied with the British monarchy. However, look at Saudi Arabia and see the difference.

[joebrook]

Dictatorship never ends well even though the dictator initially wanted to really help his countrymen, it will get to a time that he will be so power drunk that he will not take constructive criticism very well and that's when he starts to maltreat his countrymen imprisoning and killing anyone who dare speaks against him

[Sithara007]

I would prefer a non-corrupt dictatorship to a corrupt-democracy. Let's compare China with India. The former is a communist dictatorship, while the latter is a democracy. In 1950, China was lagging behind India in terms of literacy, healthcare and human development. But now they are miles ahead, thanks to the visionary leadership. On the other hand, India has slipped quite far behind, partially due to the corruption by the ruling Nehru-Gandhi family.

[Crankautist]

I would prefer a non-corrupt dictatorship to a corrupt-democracy. Let's compare China with India. The former is a communist dictatorship, while the latter is a democracy. In 1950, China was lagging behind India in terms of literacy, healthcare and human development. But now they are miles ahead, thanks to the visionary leadership. On the other hand, India has slipped quite far behind, partially due to the corruption by the ruling Nehru-Gandhi family.

A dictatorship has one systemic problem.
You are depending on one sole leader entity that is controlling everything.
If the leader is good everything is fine. If your leader is called stalin, pol pot, hitler, nixon then you got a serious problem.

In a democracy there exist checks and balances, transparency, free press and usually a strong civil society.

Similiar to the concept of decentralisation vs centralisation

[veleten]

as we all know Democracy is the power of the Democrats
there is no such a thing as true democracy,also greeks considered it to be the lowest form of the goverments
democracy is just a smoke screen for the worst types of dictatorships and those honest enough
to not be hiding it behind the "democratic" institutions (and not strong enough to repel the democratic agression) aka Lybia,Iraq etc.
are usually made an example of and destroyed,for peace and human rights,of course

[TheCoinGrabber]

"A gilded cage is still a cage."

Democracy is best when it comes to personal freedoms. The main flaw of course is that it's only as good as its electorate. Go look up The Dictator's Handbook. You wouldn't be disappointed.

[BADecker]

Notice the topic title. It says "Dictator ship." Ships are on the ocean. Ships are owned. The captain is set in place by the owners as dictator on the ship. The reason for this is that ships often encounter dangerous weather and other dangers on the high seas. The captain has to be experienced, and has to be dictator to protect the ship from disaster. Democracy takes too long to work on a ship that is in danger.

On land it is different. Outside of temporary dictatorship-like emergencies (earthquake, flood, tornado), the people have the right to self-rule. Why? Because the people and the land are one. The people eat from the soil. Dictators aren't supposed to rule the people like they might rule their own piece of real estate.

[BTCMILLIONAIRE]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

It's about the motive of the ruler.
And Dictatorship or democracy is just a disguise.
No one can run a country without popular support from its citizens.
The parliamentary democratic system is so corrupt that no good person can rise to the top.

Reality in a nutshell. Also why I decided to never go into politics, since it's a waste of my lifetime. I'm not very fond of democracy either, since it's steered by money and power (by manipulating the public consens). And even if it wasn't, I wouldn't want people who do not take the time to carefully and objectively research facts being able to vote on important matters that directly impact my life. That's no different from being bullied by a stronger, but stupid and shortsighted, group of people.
Dictatorship isn't a lot better either though, unless the leader actually cares about betterment of humanity as a whole while actually having the competence to carry out long term visions.

[bakul idu]

Modern humans the smart and would prefer democracy , because in democracy is free to pass an opinion

[achsan fauzy]

I think system dictator is a system of duping to the people. System dictator must be abolished.

[BADecker]

Democracy is simply dictatorship by the majority. Forget both, democracy, and formal dictatorship. Go for freedom.

The only freedom that is not allowed is to harm someone, or damage his property.

[Mometaskers]

Some people root for benevolent dictatorship but even that can go wrong if the successor is a dipstick. It seems one party countries with some level of political participation works OK enough (example, Singapore). Still, it is best if people are free to express themselves (with reasonable limits of course).

Democracy is simply dictatorship by the majority. Forget both, democracy, and formal dictatorship. Go for freedom.

The only freedom that is not allowed is to harm someone, or damage his property.

So basically anarchy? What type of anarchy though? There seem to be several.

[Xester]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

I want to try being under dictatorship.  I am living in a democratic country wherein everything that was done whether it is good or bad always ends up stating about its freedom.  I do not think that having so much freedom gives good thing in one country.  Democracy lacks discipline.  Yes, it is up to people whether you are disciplined or not.  But no one will do the right thing if there is always so much freedom.

[September11]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

It's about the motive of the ruler.
And Dictatorship or democracy is just a disguise.
No one can run a country without popular support from its citizens.
The parliamentary democratic system is so corrupt that no good person can rise to the top.

This is a quite accurate answer.
We could add that dictatorships usually are more efficient in the beginning, when the dictator has come to power due to the support from his people, and far less efficient years or decades later when his mind is not very lucid any more but he still has a strong grip on power.

[martina14]

Democracy is good but sometimes it is over use and most dirty politician use that democracy to ruin the country, dictatorship is ok as long as it is use for a good running of the country!!

[innocent93]

If we look at the history some countries got maximum development in Dictator ship while some got maximum development in democratic government. Every system has it's own flaws and benefits. What do you like ? if we talk about the welfare of general people.

It depends of the historical moment. I mean if we are in peace then absolutely democracy, no doubt about it, but if we are in a military conflict then the things would go better with  dictators. For example Winston Churchill wouldn't have been a good prim minister if it wouldn't have been the WW2. At that moment he was the perfect choice.