Democracy Creates Stability In A Society

Dear Ms Quah pls mark my blog assignment. I'm sorry but my computer was sent for repair yesterday. Thank you.

Most countries nowadays either have a democratic government system or have some characteristics of one. Democracy is a form of government in which power is vested in the people and exercised directly or representatively under a free electoral system. Democracy has its pros and cons, and can bring about stability in a society. This stability can be in the economic, social and political aspects of the society.

An important strength of democracy is that it always involves the community. The people can express their thoughts as long as it is legal and the government may look into it. Direct democracy is better, as it provides a way to repeal against legislation that is deemed to be bad, making way for better ones.

Switzerland is a good example highlighting the benefits of a (direct) democratic society. Swiss citizens can call for referendums or initiatives and voting is done nationwide to determine the legislation. This has led to the implementation of good legislation, which began as initiatives or referendums, such as the proposal allowing women to vote in 1971. This law also means equality in Switzerland, in turn brining social and political stability in the country.

Another advantage of democracy is that the government will strive to make life better for all. For example, the Singapore government makes a conscientious effort to maintain economic freedom and a free market in the society. The Singapore government provides a clear and predictable legal framework for businesses. Regulations are administered in an open and transparent system, and applied fairly to all. Furthermore, the Singapore government ensures that citizens have some private ownership of property and businesses and people are free to choose their own work. This has allowed Singapore’s economy to grow strongly through the years and her citizens to be happy.

However, democracy may bring about problems too. For example, a downside in Switzerland’s direct democracy is the holding of too many referenda. When people are allowed to voice their hearts out, they will appeal against every legislation they find fault with. This will not only lead to people feeling that direct democracy is all about having referendums over practically anything (trivial or major), but also waste the government’s time and even money on less important matters (which they cannot reject straightaway as a democratic society). Here, it seems that control on freedom of speech is necessary.

Yet another problem is voter fatigue. In democratic societies, citizens can choose whether or not to vote. This will, however, lead to low turnout rates, for example when the issue is only related to some groups of people. Worse is when a major issue drags on for too long and people cannot be bothered to vote or know the outcome anymore. Low turnout rates may lead to lob-sided results and also protest votes, which may affect the general stability of the society.

All in all, I believe that the pros of democracy outweigh the cons, as long as the government is not corrupt and can satisfy the wants and needs of the all, if not the majority. However, it is key that voters make a wise option and not abuse their rights of voting, which may end up in an undesirable situation in which an incapable government is voted in. Citizens should also have foresight and cooperate with the government in many ways such as providing valuable information, and not add to the already demanding tasks of the government by bringing up irrelevant or trivial matters. Only if the conditions of having both good citizens and government are fulfilled, can democracy create stability in a society.