What do you mean by a single party system ? What are its advantages and disadvantages ?
chise ?
Answers
Answer:
DISADVANTAGES:
A monopoly on the vote. Virtually every economist agrees that a company holding a monopoly is problematic for the economy. For one, it is able to suck up any corporation that threatens it's existence. Thus, people are not given an alternative— they must buy from that company or not buy anything at all. Because there is no alternative, companies can sell whatever they want and do whatever they want. Innovation is stifled. Similarly, one party systems stifle public sector innovation. Since people have no alternative, they are forced to abide by the policy of that party. Any competing party, and their innovative and reformative ideas, is crushed. As a result, areas that are under government control (the economy, for example), stagnate, as the government is unable to implement innovative policy that could potentially transform the sector. Parties are immune to any change if the public doesn't want change, and thus can do what they please. Most one party systems often have a single party that acts recklessly, since they are sure that the electorate will vote for them regardless of what they do (see India under Congress rule, 1947-1977 and 1980-1996) This facilitates corruption.
Parties in one party systems can be out of touch with the people. As stated above, one party systems have a single party that holds a monopoly on the electorate; they kill (often literally) any and all competition, which can include the people. In more authoritarian systems, the people are prevented from stating anything that is contradictory to what the government is implementing. As a result, people are left out of the decision making process, and the government stays out of touch with their demands. This has dire consequences. An irritable and rebellious public will often resort to drastic means to have their voice heard (see Tiananmen Square). A conservative public will often let the party do what they want. The party will continue to implement its vision, or its idea of what it believes is right for the people. This vision may be wrong and can negatively affect the public.
ADVANTAGES:
Efficiency. A system in which a single party is constantly elected into power is a very efficient system, if used correctly. As with the PAP in Singapore, the party is free to enact its vision as it sees fit. They do not have to go through a strident opposition whose views may halt progress. Policy is implemented more quickly and efficiently.
Democracy. If the system is elected, and competition is nominally encouraged but simply not there, then the people may have considerable and often direct say on what the party is implementing. In a democratic one-party system, the party may fear losing power if they do not listen to the views of the public. As a result, the party is forced to listen to the public in order to retain power. This allows the people to be more directly involved with government. Unlike in the US, where we watch two parties bicker over issues we don't care about, a one-party system has two options: either they listen to the public and continue winning, or they don't and are kicked out of power. In other words, there is no politicization of issues, and if there is, the party will get kicked out. This promotes efficiency and democracy, in a view similar to the Roussean social contract. plaese follow me and mark as brainlist
Answer:
single party system means that majority of the people vote a single party only rest other parties don't get much votes comparing to this one party
ADVANTAGES
1. Parties don't need to do more hard work
DISADVANTAGES
1. Parties don't get more value as they get before