3. Give arguments to support or oppose the following assertions:
•Industrialised countries can afford democracy but the poor need dictatorship to become rich.
•Democracy can’t reduce inequality of incomes between different citizens.
•The government in poor countries should spend less on poverty reduction, health, education and spend more on industries and infrastructure.
In a democracy, all citizens have one vote, which means that there is an absence of any domination and conflict.
Answers
Give arguments to support or oppose the following assertions:
- Industrialised countries can afford democracy but the poor need dictatorship to become rich.
- Democracy can’t reduce inequality of incomes between different citizens.
- The government in poor countries should spend less on poverty reduction, health, education and spend more on industries and infrastructure.
- In a democracy, all citizens have one vote, which means that there is an absence of any domination and conflict.
- Industrialised countries can afford democracy, but the poor need dictatorship to become rich – There is no relationship between democracy and the wealth of the nation. The economic development of the nation is dependent upon the resources, the policies and the openness of the government to attract investment. If the dictatorship could have brought wealth in the nation, countries like Nigeria would be having all rich people, which is not the case in reality.
- Yes, democracy can not reduce income inequality as there are sectional communities which have different professions. Income equality is not a value of democracy as democracy brings social and political equality. People have the right to vote and can access fundamental rights, but income is self-generated, and that depends on their ability to work.
- The statement is untrue. For any country to be developed, the focus should be on human resources. The country is made up of its people, and if the citizens are uneducated, ill and under-sufficient, the country cannot grow. The human development report in itself judges the development of the country by the education and health of the citizen along with the income. Hence, it is important for a country to invest in health and education infrastructure.
- The statement is partly true. Yes, democracy offers one vote to each of its citizens. However, it is not a fool-proof system that does not invite any conflicts. Take the example of India, which has a diverse diaspora. The social divisions in the society are reflected in the form of riots, protests and strikes. Hence, no democracy can eliminate social divisions.
ANSWER
• This statement is incorrect as can be seen from the examples of India and Zimbabwe. In 1947, India was included in the Third World nations, but now, it is one of the fast-growing economies in the world. On the other hand, Zimbabwe, which was a fairly prosperous nation, has run into huge international debt with the progression of Robert Mugabe's regime.
• Democracy can't reduce inequality of incomes between different citizens. This statement is incorrect. The Minimum Wages Act enacted by the government and other policies which regulate the basic price at which agricultural producers and small industries sell their goods have helped increase the per capita income of the country, thereby making its citizens more prosperous.
• The government in poor countries should spend less on poverty reduction, health, education and spend more on industries and infrastructure. This is not a wise option as in poor countries, the people cannot afford health and education services.
• In democracy, all citizens have one vote, which means that there is the absence of any domination and conflict. This is not true as conflict can be eliminated only in an ideal situation. In real democracies, though every person has one vote, there are divisions among the people. These divisions lead to conflict.