When we talk to people around us, most of them support democracy against
other alternatives, such as rule by a monarch or military or religious leaders.
But not so many of them would be satisfied with the democracy in practice. So
we face a dilemma: democracy is seen to be good in principle, but felt to be not
so good in its practice. This dilemma invites us to think hard about the
outcomes of democracy. Do we prefer democracy only for moral reasons? Or
are there some prudential reasons to support democracy too? Over a hundred
countries of the world today claim and practice some kind of democratic
politics: they have formal constitutions, they hold elections, they have parties
and they guarantee rights of citizens. While these features are common to most
of them, these democracies are very much different from each other in terms of
their social situations, their economic achievements and their cultures. Clearly,
what may be achieved or not achieved under each of these democracies will
be very different.
Answers
Answer:
Do you remember how students in
Madam Lyngdoh’s class argued about
democracy? This was in Chapter 2 of
Class IX textbook. It emerged from that
conversation that democracy is a better
form of government when compared
with dictatorship or any other alternative.
We felt that democracy was better
because it:
Promotes equality among citizens;
Enhances the dignity of the
individual;
Improves the quality of decisionmaking;
Provides a method to resolve
conflicts; and
Allows room to correct mistakes.
Are these expectations realised under
democracies? When we talk to people
around us, most of them support
democracy against other alternatives,
such as rule by a monarch or military or
religious leaders. But not so many of
them would be satisfied with the
democracy in practice. So we face a
dilemma: democracy is seen to be good
in principle, but felt to be not so good in
its practice. This dilemma invites us to
think hard about the outcomes of
democracy. Do we prefer democracy
only for moral reasons? Or are there
some prudential reasons to support
democracy too?
Over a hundred countries of the
world today claim and practice some
kind of democratic politics: they have
formal constitutions, they hold elections,
they have parties and they guarantee rights
of citizens. While these features are
common to most of them, these
democracies are very much different
from each other in terms of their social
situations, their economic achievements
and their cultures. Clearly, what may be
achieved or not achieved under each of
these democracies will be very different.
But is there something that we can expect
from every democracy, just because it is
democracy?
Our interest in and fascination for
democracy often pushes us into taking a
position that democracy can address all
socio-economic and political problems.
If some of our expectations are not met,
we start blaming the idea of democracy.
Or, we start doubting if we are living in
a democracy. The first step towards
thinking carefully about the outcomes
of democracy is to recognise that
democracy is just a form of government.
It can only create conditions for achieving
something. The citizens have to take
advantage of those conditions and
achieve those goals. Let us examine some
of the things we can reasonably expect
from democracy and examine the record
of democracy.
Explanation:
PLS MARK ME AS BRAINLIEST
Answer:
the answer to ur question is The argument ‘d’, which states that “Democracies are more prosperous than others”, is not a good argument in favour of democracy. This is because some democracies like India are still developing economically, while monarchies like the states of UAE are economically strong.