12 of 72

Write now Article Tools

Page 2 of 2

democracy is divisive. It is usually workable where people are homogeneous and need to be split along different ideologies to enrich the politics. But in African countries that have so many ethnic groupings, to create many political parties will boil down to promoting ethnicity because each group will likely have their own party, representing their narrow cultural aspirations. It is better for all of these groups to be united under a single, powerful political platform.

3. There is no sincerity in the commitment to democracy even in the West. The masses of people are merely deceived to think that they are participating in the choice of their leaders. The reality however, is that only the rich and the monied class determines who rules.

4. It is knot always that the crowd knows what is best for their nation. Many nations have a low literacy level. How can the congregation of ignorant uneducated people be effective in addressing serious economic, political or even ecological concerns of global dimensions?

5. What happens if it is the wish of the people to have a benevolent dictator to rule over them? Will this decision not be considered democratic? Moreover, will the government that emerges in the aftermath of this decision not be considered democratic? Can democracy not choose to end democracy?

The greatest advantage of democracy seems to be in the fact that it allows for the participation of people in their own governance. But as we have seen the contrary argument shows that this participation is only a myth. Elections are either rigged or the electoral process open only to the rich. Well, this argument does not show that democracy is bad, but that it is subject to abuse. There is therefore need to secure our democratic tradition and free it from violations. This becomes the task of civil society.

The question now is, what must we do to safeguard our democracy? Perhaps the best way to do it is to empower civil society and educate its citizen. Democracy would best thrive where literacy level is high. Another way is to democratize all institutions in the society the press, the Universities, the judiciary, and so forth.

But far more important than this is the so called superiority of multi-party democracy. Does democracy necessarily put food on our tables? How many people are even interested in participating in government? Is it not true that most people will be happy with any system of government for long as it puts food on their tables?

The problem with this line of thinking is that it places too much faith on man. No body should rule without checks. And only democracy provides checks and balance. A benevolent dictator might be nice today, but who can predict the future? What happens when circumstances push the dictator to lose his benevolence? Who will then check him? Who will control his excesses? There is safety for both the ruler and the ruled if power is not concentrated in one hand and if more people participate in governance. This will safeguard human rights, individual liberties, a sense of self worth and dignity, which I believe will translate to bread in the long run.

Learn more about this author, Osam Edim.
Click here to send this author comments or questions.

• << previous page
• 1
• 2

Add your voice

Know something about Understanding democracy?
We want to hear your view. Write now!