Art, asked by Kurian5511, 11 months ago

if democracy means govt of the people, for the people and by the people why cant every person behave in a way he wants to'.

Answers

Answered by yuvathilagan
2

Answer:

mark \: brainlist

Attachments:
Answered by prithakundu
1

Explanation:

Some notion of social contract underlies democracy, government by conset of the government, representative following the social will. You form a government in democratic fashion in order to work together. It’s a system of joint cooperation under mutual respect. The reason you need it is to organize. Individuals doing whatever they want run into serious conflicts with each other. Individuals working alone can barely fulfill their needs for the most part much less interests that extend further. That’s especially if others can just exploit the resources they use to fulfill their needs.

Democracy is based on working together where we commit to “all being in it together” to some extent, each contributing to a common something. Libertarians agree to this system at least for the protection of their individual rights or entitlements, even though they wish to do whatever they want under them. But their rights put duties of respect on other people which is an imposition on their liberty. So to get the respect they need they have to deal, to cooperate to win consent.

There are individualists and non-individualists, they have to get along and work out a deal. Mostly there are families, working as families, not individuals at all. Inside these units responsibilities make sense but rights or entitlements are intrusive, almost hostile. Respect must be gotten without strong demands.

Somehow we must come up with a set of systems that mutually address not only these differences in interest but differences in the sense of proper social purpose, in self-definition and moral self-definition to boot. Some just want to be left alone. Some want to work in unity, altogether. This is why a de-centralized or federated democratic system seems to work best, allowing at least a little choice on who to be, where to live what to do as we choose. Some democracies leave the economy free-wheeling, free market, so here individuals can make individual deals with other individuals without having to worry about what society thinks. Unfortuantely, business deals lead eventually to large companies and monopolies that concentrate wealth, become governance structures themselves and then engage in “political capture” actually buying elected representation by buying elections.

A government itself has to do with protecting, administering and regulating the solutions we come up with together where we can not do so ourselves voluntarily. It uses law (threat and en-FORCE-ment) to do so whereas true democracy involves voluntary cooperation, mutually self-determined not coerced cooperation. It can require less threat, less pressured compromise among people where it too is de-centralized or federated allow more choices as with the US.

(or)

Because the democracy, theoretically the majority, or the republic, the represented citizens, have chosen laws and rules through their elected officials, hopefully so that everyone can be safe, and conduct business safely. Imagine a world where someone could say "I am going to sell you these widgets for 25 dollars." And then they take your 25 and disappear.

The existence of rules and law protects people and gives them a more certain outcome on events than anarchy.

(or)

Your question smells of fundamental extremism. Just because we are a democracy does not mean that there are not limits.

Everything in moderation, nothing in excess.

Some people want to behave in such a way that harms other people, or is likely to harm other people.

If what you want to do can possibly hurt other people you are not allowed to do it.

This restriction on harmful behavior keeps you safer from harm.

(or)

A society without laws to govern human behavior results in chaos where everyone does what they want without concern for others.

In a democracy citizens elect representatives to vote on laws which protect them from exploitation. As opposed to nouthetic system government which is run by those who have the money and power, this system allows the people more say in the making of laws

hope this helps you and have a good day.

Similar questions