Why democracy is still the best form of government | Alex Tan | TEDxChristchurch
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 3 พ.ค. 2024
- With scandal, corruption and nationalism on the rise, it's easy to feel a sense of despair about the state of democracy. But is the alternative any better? In this insightful talk, Professor Alex Tan makes the case that democracy is still the best form of government -- and shares the secret of which kind of democracy works best.
Alex Tan is Head of Department and Professor of Political Science and International Relations, Honorary Professor of the New Zealand Defence Force Command and Staff College, Associate Director of the NZ Contemporary China Research Centre, Senior Fellow of the University of Nottingham China Policy Institute (UK), Fellow of the John Goodwin Tower Center for Political Studies (Dallas, USA), and University Chair Professor of Political Science (adjunct) at National Chengchi University (Taiwan). He has published extensively in the areas of political parties and elections, political economy, Asian politics and international affairs. This talk was given at a TEDx event using the TED conference format but independently organized by a local community. Learn more at www.ted.com/tedx
“For Monarchy to work, one man must be wise. For Democracy to work, a majority of the people must be wise. Which is more likely?” - Charles Maurras.
@NichtDerZocka The old king is not just replaced by whoever can seize the throne but by the one next in line, typically the crown prince who has spent most of their life being prepared for the role.
@NichtDerZocka Of course elections don't happen in a monarchy.
The second thing, because the amount of wisdom one man must possess to know what's good for everyone is nearly unfathomable. The real question you should be asking is "the monarch is wise, or the monarch is greedy and entitled, which is more likely?"
These wise men would see your head roll for talking out of line.
Confederations holds a better form of government
Democracy will always be ruled by those that control the discussion.
Wrong. That's a sign of WEAK democracy. It hasn't always been that way, and it doesn't have to be. Let us NOT throw the baby out with the bathwater, d***a**.
Better Education = Better Democracy
Well of course you also need a democracy that is set up in such a way that it is actually fair in the first place.
@@samuelforesta Yeah exactly
No one expects a steel worker to understand physics so why should we expect them to understand politics
Democracy does produce dictatorship,
Look at Germany 1933, if the conditions is right, using freedom of speech, you can control people mind and hate on another group of people
Meanwhile Our school : (a^2+b^2) = c^2
A bit akward listening to this after watching "The Death of Democracy" and "Our democracy no longer represents the people".
I can completely understand. The points here hold less weight in comparison to those videos.
I don't know if you're a U.S. citizen, from looking at your name. If you are then look into Corporate Constitution ( The act of 1871). America was created as a republic, not a democracy. The act of 1871 turned America into a democracy. The difference between a democracy and a republic... in a democracy, the majority rules. In a republic, the constitution protects the minority.
Will watch the 2 videos mentioned... tysm for this info
@TH-cam Account#:457 USA has never been a democracy.. its a Republic.. Know what your talking about before you give an empty opinion!
@@tomriddle4121 Play on words. A Republic is a form of democracy.
"Why do we blame democracy instead of blaming ourselves?" really seems like its begging the question.
This debate about whether democracy is best form of governance will be a question that will continue for generations to come . It really comes down to the person leading the country.
Be it a totalitarian one sometimes
We can debate on democracy because we live in a democracy; under an absolute monarchy, the only way to debate on it is with weapons. Many dictators are complete fools, every dictator is an egomaniac, you must hope to your dictator is also smart and not only an egocentric
But isn't it cool under Democracy we are free to have such discussions
@@GaetanoBonaparte Exactly
@@GaetanoBonaparte You say as if the only kind of government that is open to debate is democracy
I mean, there are limitless possibilities of non-democratic governments open to debate if they are good or not
Democracy is one of them, but this fact isn’t enough to say if it’s good enough as a political system
@@sla7889 Hi, do you have some exemple, please?
it depends on what u mean by democracy, and it depends on who is in power
True Democracy isn't truely ruled by it's government. True Democracy works itself & is infraStructured by Government....
there’s direct democracy & representative democracy
Its intellectually dishonest for him to only use subjective opinions by citizens who live in a democracy, especially because by definition most of the citizens in a democracy believe in democracies.
Gabry Gobbetto actually, thats a good point.
He uses majority opinion to justify using majority opinion - circular argument begging the question fallacy...! an argument from majority fallacy to justify an argument from majority fallacy
Democracy is objectively the best system because its citizens subjectively prefer it.
are you argue, that dictatorship is better form of goverment instead democracy?
The alternative to democracy isnt necessarily dictatorship, an example is a presidential governments with democratic elections (dont be fooled by the presence of "democratic" in the name, its fundamentally and practically different to a democracy)
Wow this completely changed my perspective! What an interesting and thoughtful presentation!
I have him as a professor. His rants can go on for way longer
100% Agree! Or all 7.6 billion of us could always become roving bandits. Surely that would solve everything.
@@petrakay1168 it’s like you two somehow both know each other...
Oh wow, something actually changed someone’s mind, that’s how you know this guys argument is good.
No matter which form of government is there...it ends with dictatorship or autocracy but still we must sustain democracy as much as we can
democracy is upholding
You're wrong.
Check democratic countries in the world of year 1900 , 1950 and 2000
the government dies under an autocrat, 'cause we let him do it, we must fight and defend our liberty
Democracy always defaults to dictatorships or autocracies.
dictatorship and democracy is like a cycle, however democracy seems to win more, and is sustained for way longer
Something like half of the recommended videos I'm seeing on the sidebar are talks about how democracy is flawed or failing and why the majority is always wrong.
Sometimes I love the youtube algorithm.
Trust me its not algorithm , there are people who are paid "great" salary to prepare your suggestions
@@yaxshah167 No, it's the algorithm, but the algorithm by and large does whatever the youtube execs want it to do. Programming biases into an automated system makes a lot more sense than hiring the absurd number of people it would take to hand-tailor people's recommendations.
@@spazmagoog actually we both meant the same
There are people writing algorithm , have access to all your data and are able to manipulate you into watching unnecessary yet interesting things.
Game of attention.
Wonderful topic and an excellent speaker. His speaking was clear, thoughtful, and relevant. I wish more people could communicate their knowledge in this way... I believe so much more could be accomplished.
What if I don't care which party wins....
Democracy results in the rule by those with an ability to win votes.....not the wisest with an ability to govern..- plato
Only wise man will have the ability to win votes. Only Wiseman will have the intellect and speech abilities to persuade thinking people to support them. There really is no such thing as foolish politicians. The demagogues are not fools dont be fooled.
@@mesafintfanuel8439 you subject wise to equate to manipulation.
@NichtDerZocka It takes no more than a passing glance at the political situation in any major country today to clearly and thoroughly disprove that.
@NichtDerZocka You mean like a constitutional republic, for example? I'd love to.
@my BMW But democracy gives you the ability to select between the cultic politician, the wise politician and the lying politician. If you select the lying politician for a term you can deselect him and select the wise politician in the next term. And because of this mechanism the damage done by the lying or cultic politician is curtailed on a term by term bases. I mean even after achieving power as a lier you would know that if you do not deliver on the false promises you made the people would probably remember it in the election.
i live in the world's largest democracy, india. and if you ask me, i have sort of a very mixed opinion on democracy. it honestly does not matter which form of the government it is. it all depends on the sort of person elected/chosen. better education definintely brings out the best in democracy. no system is perfect, but atleast democracy tries to maintain equality and liberty unlike others. trust me you wouldnt want to go under kim jong or joseph stalin or yahya khans dictatorial politics.
Your country got so many people different languages and things going on India I can only imagine how hard it would be to govern India
India is supposed to be a text book example when it comes to cons of democracy-- vote banking from taking advantage of the religious fanaticism.
No form of government is without flaws, but democracy is the best out of all the flawed forms of government. Many criticising democracy are those armchair critics who are just deluded with it. We usually tend to forget that for every right there is a corresponding duty. And the duty goes beyond mere casting vote to protecting and fighting for the values and the fruits of democracy itself.
Democracy in its most ideal form is okay. The problem is when most of the eligible voters are not educated or intelligent enough to vote correctly.
what about instilling epistocratic values into our existent form of government?
Democracies are the worst form of government there’s a reason why almost no country has one.
Democracies always self-struct.
@@stayswervin554 india usa and France : am I joke to you
@@stayswervin554 Switzerland, USA, UK, Norway: Are we a joke to you?
Tan contested under the Reform Party banner in 2011 as his party, the Singapore People's Party, was not interested in contesting in the Prime Minister's ward. As the main organizer of the two parties' joint walkabouts, Tan sought the Reform Party's help to contest in Ang Mo Kio GRC. The Reform Party then "loaned" Alex from the Singapore People's Party to contest in the ward.
In his maiden election speech, Tan underscored the lack of a social safety net for the elderly in Singapore and the influx of foreigners that has diluted Singaporeans' identity. Other campaigning issues he took on included the state of overcrowding, cost of living and the lack of transparency and accountability in the national retirement fund, the Central Provident Fund, and the national reserves. In one of his speeches, Tan questioned Dr Vivian Balakrishnan about statements Balakrishnan had made about the government wealth fund GIC's portfolio having returned to pre-crisis levels and claimed that no statistics or figures were provided to back up the statements.
In an open letter on the States Times Review, Tan challenged law minister K Shanmugam to face-off against each other in a Single Member Constituency at the 2020 general elections.[7]
Just awesome..... ❤️❤️
Kratos means Strength or Power so Democracy is not "the ruling of the people" but The Power the Strength of the People.
*Why Monarchy is the Best form of government:*
1. You know who to hold responsible, and a bullet will solve it.
(In democracy, there are so many oligarchs nothing will change if one is gone.)
2. Long term planning, over term based planning.
(A king must plan ahead for decades, not just a few years which will get changed by the next elected rep.)
3. You can blame the monarch when something goes wrong, instead of the politicians blaming the voters as they always do.
(It's a lot harder for a king to shift the blame when they are the highest authority of the land.)
4. Buying a politician is cheap, buying a king isn't.
(Paying a politician into betraying his own countries interests for profit is simple, a kings interests are rooted in his kingdoms. So it's far more difficult.)
5. A king actually cares about what is his, unlike the average politician.
(A kings children will inherit what he leaves behind, where as a politician leaves office after their term is up and leaves the office like a public urinal.)
6. Democracy is an illusion of power, when the media / news / and trending issues are controlled by financial interests.
(Money talks the loudest in a democracy as a vote is even cheaper than a politician.)
7. Need I go on?
If I understand correctly the democracy here means the liberal democracy and Singapore may not be one of them. It seems not fair to call the liberal democracy “democracy” only while the non-liberal democracy “dictatorship”. Among the various republic democracies does the good governing is better for people?
You’re joking right 😂
I'll take monarchy over what these moonbats call democracy any day of the week.
I should've listened to this before we started our debate cuz this makes more sense!
Democracy is the best option to let rich people control the system
"democracy is not perfect, but we should never let the perfect be the enemy of the good"
Pls explain this statement, I didn't get it...
"just because it didn't work out for y ou, doesn't mean it didn't work out for me."
“Democracy is cringe read some Aristotle”-John Doyle
A person of quality
This comment is brought to you by People Republic of China government
@@dickyarya8204 yes!
The world needs this video more than ever before.
Democracies always get to a deadlock, a stalemate, especially in ages of idealism such nowadays. Plato warned us 2400 years ago. Aristocracy is more preferable, as long as "the few" can regulate themselves and believe in their people. All in all any system soon or later will corrupt.
American was corrupted back in 1871. Look into Corporate constitution, the act of 1871. America was formed as a republic not a democracy. The act of 1871 change America into a democracy. We have been living under an illusion of freedom for a very long time.
@@davidduhe1657 define freedom then
Read the constitution.
Assuming that a system will corrupt inevitably regardless of type; the efficiency of the system must be based upon its ability to remove/change/progress from the point of corruption. Corruption within an aristocracy has historically proved difficult to remove, often resorting to civil war; it is also much easier for those in power to be corrupt as there is no strong from of scrutiny (check and balances) within the aristocratic system. A democracy however, provides many checks and balances to those in power, most importantly the scrutiny of the public. It's dangerous for sovereignty to solely lie in the hands of 'the few', sovereignty should always be spread/devolved otherwise change and progression proves impossible.
And if they can't? How does a non democratic society hold them accountable?
"A democracy cannot exist as a permanent form of government. It can only exist until the voters discover that they can vote themselves money from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority always votes for the candidates promising the most benefits from the public treasury with the result that a democracy always collapses over loose fiscal policy, always followed by a dictatorship. The average age of the world's greatest civilizations has been 200 years. These nations have progressed through this sequence: From bondage to spiritual faith; From spiritual faith to great courage; From courage to liberty; From liberty to abundance; From abundance to selfishness; From selfishness to apathy; From apathy to dependence; From dependence back into bondage.
It is a wise way to use critical thinking to think about everything, what thing is the best in the world? "Everything has two sides".
he never explored the alternatives I guess
You did not listen to him. Watch it again.
He didn't have to. He was himself a victim of the alternative
He mentioned the dictatorship era during 70s-mid 80s.... under Marcos.
Nice perspective
Democracy is immortal 🇨🇭
A true democracy treats everybody 100% the same. This is needed so that everybody feels "at home" in their surroundings. Make fines (financial penalties) a percentage of our income. EVERYBODY pays tax which is a fair percentage of our income. And NOBODY can settle out of court. Peace 🙏❤️☀️
Yes please!
I dont belive democracy is the best form of goverment, because presidents are elected every four years they dont have enough time to make big changes,and they make bigger expenses then before because they dont care next guy will inherit them. Aristocracy is much better form of government in my oppinion
Wrong. The U.S. is not a democracy, it is a weird republic.
@@limetea2651 usa canot be classified as republic, it might be closest to switzerland and british goverment.
@@trivunkonjik7413 I pledge of allegiance to the flag of the United States of America, and to the "REPUBLIC" for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
that's my political science professor !!
Great 👍 from Melbourne
I hope he can go to Ukrayina to make a research on how democracy change their life.
For better or for worse?
@@songa520 In 30 years of "freedom" the only thing Ukraine achieved was that it pretty much let itself be enslaved by the West
@@songa520 in sickness and in health
"the alternatives are worse" This is literally the only defense the pro-democracy people have. There are in fact multiple alternatives to not only democracy, but also to dictatorship and hereditary monarchy. In various periods of Chinese history, China was governed by scholar-bureaucrats who achieved their positions of power by scoring highly on the imperial exams. They functioned as a cognitive aristocracy who were selected on the basis of merit, instead of such irrational criteria as heredity, military power, or the will of the people. This seems like the greatest and most realistic alternative to democracy.
I'm honestly pretty against democracy but I could get behind that form of it
Governance by scholar bureaucrats is a nice idea in theory, but there are reasons why it's not in practice today.
Sortition
Because sure they can't abuse their power
This can work only if those bureaucrats don't misuse their power which is almost impossible for a long period of time. Even in my country bureaucrats hold important positions in government after clearing imperial exams but every few days there is a news of a bureaucrat being charged for corruption, mistreating middle income local people due to having high authoritive power.
There is no such thing as democracy, only oligarchy and plutocracy. You need to grow up.
"But if every body was thoughtful and wise about politics, like plato said, democracy would be great"
I'll believe that as soon as everyone makes a home run in a ball game.
Great video
the system isn't perfect, but that is okay because it at least maintains the essential liberties of the people and maintains the capacity for the people to choose the direction of the nation.
Is that a joke? We are currently living under a tyranny under which we are told what we have to wear, where we are allowed to go, and how many people we are allowed to go there with. What liberties do you think are being preserved? Democracy is nothing but the slow erosion of liberty.
@@flacjacket and yet we have the capacity to argue against those difficulties, even the right to protest against them. freedoms that many do not have. those are esstential.
"it at least maintains the essential liberties of the people and maintains the capacity for the people to choose the direction of the nation."
Wrong.
@@albion6087 - Didn't people protest those same difficulties in early January 2021?
Superb presentation
democracy is a great system under one condition. if the people who are voting are educated on the issues. This is often not the case though. Hence china has a one party system managed by people who understands the issue.
Bold of you to assume people are given power in communism because they are competent...
@@antalpoti i didn't say china was communist. did I? china is a new political system. Its not taught in the text books because the chinese model is constantly evolving. Communist can't have a stock market. the chinese model is closest to the singapore model
1) Best large scale form of governance
2) majority of Democratic citizens support democracy
3) comparison: democracies are wealthier, less corrupt, higher levels of human development, citizens enjoy more human rights.
4) majority voting = more correct policies and decisions
5) achieves responsiveness, representation, and accountability
y ou forgot one fatal flaw... politicians are capable of lying/changing their mind.
"Why should we blame democracy when we should blame ourselves" dead on im republican and i know the issue at hand ive shaken my head when 2016 election came around i did not believe a single word unless they said something i can agree too and that was very very vague
democracy does not work becouse there people comment something that does not make sense,come on if a vehicle is work properly and have an accident, we not blame the vehicle (democracy) we should blame the driver... come on really
When you blame democracy, you automatically blame everyone.
After hearing to eric x li... A tale of 2 political system
Democracy or Dictatorship is not the issue, economy is. In all country with any political system, once people are rich, there will be no problem. People will be happy, nobody will be complaining that much, and their political system sustain. Once the economy is bad, all sorts of issues arise. The immigrant country is turning against immigration, war emerges between left and right, and everyone is complaining about virtually everything.
Old tools are not the only way to solve problems, but Democracy is! Not so surprising isn't it.
Read Plato
“Richness of choices” - this man knows nothing about democracy
u Murican?
@@antalpoti xD
And besides the only decisns made by a democracy should ALWAYS be made based on science of genetics & phsychology but now days the decisns are made based on "love" & "unity" which science and maths is not only the reality but its already planned and studied by professionals that specialise in science. While presidents now days dont have a scientific plan for the future at all, while scientists do but the democracy doesnt choose to go by a plan they choose to take the risk
An Australian and a former Singaporean political activist. That's interesting
For Democracy! 🇺🇸
US is Constitutional Republic
The irony of using surveys to see whether democracy is preferred
While often categorized as a democracy, the United States is more accurately defined as a constitutional federal republic. What does this mean? “Constitutional” refers to the fact that government in the United States is based on a Constitution which is the supreme law of the United States.
You’re right in political science, while average people use terms loosely by ignoring the differences. It seems that people use the democracy for the liberal democracy as default, especially after the neoliberalism which promoting the personal freedom as well as the economic freedom. It’s time to focus on the representative republic political systems for the good governing in which people are always involved.
In a video discussing whether using public opinion is a good system of leadership, he decides to refer to a study that shows:
A count of the general public opinion on the issue...
That's a really astute observation!
But why democracy in Philippines was still not in a good leading to my fellow humanities?
For me, democracy is great. It's the unresponsiveness and irresponsibleness of people and the government that makes it flop.
@@blank_456 You are correct. Democracy is not flawed, people are.
Because democracy depend on the people. If the people are good and the leaders are good then there will be a great nation.
well done mr Dan
I don't get why countries can't just switch to an MMP democratic system instead of an FPP one.
He is making it seem as if there can only be either democracy or dictatorship.
Democracy is flawed as has been noticed by the recent wave of populism. Dictatorship is also flawed as people are deprived of basic rights. What we need is an alternative of both.
@NichtDerZocka sharia law
@NichtDerZocka ikr i was joking 😅
@NichtDerZockaHaha many people actually believe on crazy things like nazism and theocracy and what not. I would be trolled as well
Demokrasi en uygun yönetim biçimi asla değildir.
Personally, I rather live under a roof of Democracy than one of Tyranny because I don't want to live a lifetime of Fear and Pain.
Democracy always leads to tyranny. Plato's Republic and Aristotle's Politics explained this thousands of years ago
try speaking against those in power in a "democracy" and see how safe y ou feel afterwards.
Populism is democracy
On point
"if there is no problem with democracy, then democracy will work"
Democracy cant tackle the problem of low voter turnout.
Sortition is the answer not voting
Democracy is only one from the perfect value in make a polcy. For all constitution, nation, country and all about it. It's a matter from another ideas and make all freedom to all people
We need a new type: selective democracy. In it, only informed people would be allowed to vote. Their informedness can be measured with the test taken prior to vote.
Sounds like an old type, at least in the USA.
Oh the Greeks, the Feta cheese was not their only super invention.
Im against democracy, Im against the state
@NichtDerZocka nobody should order on others, the laws should be based on private property and consent, otherwise it's aggression
@NichtDerZocka I agree with you, it is impossible to prevent aggression using flowers, that is why people must have the right to have weapons to defend themselves. How will the state protect you from aggression if it attacks you in many ways? it has to steal you through tax only to exist, an institution based on theft is not legitimate. If the force is distributed in society there is no need for a state, but the state does everything to concentrate force to use against you, the state's security services could be done by private initiative.
I didn't finish the video before I started commenting because I couldn't bear it.
The speaker fundamentally mistaken democracy as the end of the society rather than it is just a mean to deliver good life for its citizens.
The speaker also lack histocial view on all the democratical societies. To claim the democratical system had made the society(like Taiwan) rich and prosperous is just simply historically untrue. It was under Chiang Kai Shek and Chiang King Guo when Taiwan laid its economic development foundation. And they were no near to be a democracy at that time.
This is why you should wait to watch the whole video before commenting. He specifically said toward the end that he doesn't believe democracy is an end, but a continuing process/journey to better governance
10:23
3:15 hmmm less than 50% isn't very supportive
Democracy does a better job of protecting peoples rights , according to academic research.
My vote (and yes, I do realise the irony in this statement) is for a benevolent dictatership...as long as I'm in charge. No, really it will be good for everybody! ;-)
You'd said some people were nostalgic about the times they lived in a totalitarian state. Just as is true with cigarette smoking, just because a survey says people like what's going on, does not mean that it's good for them.
America is not a good example of a well-functioning democracy, there are better examples like Norway(1)/New Zealand(4)/Switzerland (10) - America is 25th behind the UK(14th) Mauritius (18) and South Korea (23).
On the democracy index carried out by The Economist, America isn't even classified as a "Full Democracy" such as the UK/Germany/Costa Rica - the USA is classified as a "Flawed Democracy" - with this in mind the US is nowhere near the top in regards to freedom/democracy.
the best countries with the best democracies in the world have a parlament and they focus on cooperation between parties while america just focus on which party can win
Checks and balance doesn’t come from Democracy.🤣
Only with God........
The army walking in the street with tanks is not valid to be called a "flaw" at all! Its proved everywhere everyday i used to see soldiers in the street everyday when i was 7 yrs old and i was ALWAYS happy to see them, ppl like him study history so much to the max level and still dont know that me and every kid in my primary school saw soldiers everyday in primary school and we were ALWAYS happy to see them and im 22 yrs old now so it wasnt long ago
Except we’re a ( Republic.........)
Democracy's middle name is Oligarchy.
Democracy was spread by the sword.Examples:
Iraq 2003
Afghanistan 2001
Libya 2011
Syria 2011
Many more
U frogot yugodlavia
Has anyone told him the US is a constitutional republic and not a democracy?
What does that mean? Do you still want to have a say in your government, or would you rather have the top 50 CEOs make all the decisions all the time?
I'm feeling uncomfortable for your stupidity
@@MilaneseGratuito ok to be more clear the US is a federal presidential constitutional republic with a representative democracy.
@@dinobuenviaje8194 nope, I don't want companies making the decisions. Thats not what a republic is about
idk chief, this talk is a bit sus.
Without God=Corruption.........
Not everyone is christian
And there has no development
Monarchy is better.
This is very flawed imo
what is everybody voted for no democracy
Democracy? Maybe you mean Republic? Democracy is slightly... different.
The resilience of democracy....
The thing is, democracy does not exist...Have ya'll never noticed that the constitution of the united states doesn't mention democracy ONCE, not a single time...kinda sus to me
Man proved democracy is best by using democracy.
6:30
Good speech indeed, but still, he effectively said nothing but democracy is good, based on fairly loose placed statistics and facts. Sorry, no cookies for you.
every country is democracy = the end of the world.
No
No
Democracy is when those who make decisions on your behalf have the duty to ask for your consent first. Today's republics are actually modern oligarchies where the interest groups of the rich are arbitrated by the people, that is, you can choose from which table of the rich you will receive crumbs.
The "fatigue" of democracy occurs when there is a big difference between the interests of the elected and the voters, thus people lose confidence in the way society functions. As a result, poor and desperate citizens will vote with whoever promises them a lifeline, i.e. populists or demagogues.
The democratic aspect is a collateral effect in societies where the economy has a strong competitive aspect, that is, the interests of those who hold the economic power in society are divergent. Thus those whealty, and implicitly with political power in society, supervise each other so that none of them have undeserved advantages due to politics. For this reason, countries where mineral resources have an important weight in GDP are not democratic (Russia, Venezuela, etc.), because a small group of people can exploit these resources in their own interest. In poor countries (Romania, Bulgaria, Greece, etc.) the main exploited resource may even be the state budget, as they have convergent interests in benefiting, in their own interest, from this resource. It is easy to see if it is an oligarchy because in a true democracy laws would not be passed that would not be in the interest of the many.
The first modern oligarchy appeared in England at the end of the 17th century. After the bourgeois revolution led by Cromwell succeeded, the interest groups of the rich were unable to agree on how to divide their political power in order not to reach the dictatorship of one. The solution was to appoint a king to be the arbiter. In republics, the people are the arbiter, but let's not confuse the possibility of choosing which group will govern you with democracy, that is, with the possibility of citizens deciding which laws to pass and which not to.
The solution is modern direct democracy in which every citizen can vote, whenever he wants, over the head of the parliamentarian who represents him. He can even dismiss him if the majority of his voters consider that he does not correctly represent their interests.
It's like when you have to build a house and you choose the site manager and the architect, but they don't have the duty to consult with you. The house will certainly not look the way you want it, but the way they want it, and it is more certain that you will be left with the money given and without the house. It is strange that outside of the political sphere, nowhere, in any economic or sports activity, will you find someone elected to a leadership position and who has failure after failure and is not fired after 4 years. We, the voters, must be consulted about the decisions and if they have negative effects we can dismiss them at any time, let's not wait for the soroco to be fulfilled, because we pay, not them. In any company, the management team comes up with a plan approved by the shareholders. Any change in this plan must be re-approved by the shareholders and it is normal because the shareholders pay.
Democracy is the first step to oligarchy.
No. Only if it isn't run well like in countries like India but for countries like Norway which democracy is almost perfect there
@@srivikgandhe7986 Democracy has horrible results, that's why Greece failed. Constitutional republics with democratic principles, where there's a check on what powers the government has, are where there can be actual freedom. Democracy is just mob rule, the majority always controls the minority.
@@jerodmckee1608 u look like some 25-30 year old man in the photo so I thought u would understand especially when I said run well o ya and that's why China is rated 64
@@jerodmckee1608 take a look at Canada, Britain, Norway, Sweden and once upon a time usa (now the usa democratic quality is not very high [25th place] ) these countries are very successful in human development rate and living index
@@srivikgandhe7986 Those countries are prisons, I believe in freedom before anything, without it there's no point.
Democracy is the worst form of government
u from china or NK?
@@srivikgandhe7986 India but there is a big reason I said this but nevertheless you are not aware of our great culture ,you do not know about our 20000+ years old civilization and great knowledge it preserves so maybe I will not be able to explain you this by just writing replies
@@srivikgandhe7986 India is the biggest democracy in the world and still there are countless conspiracies being planned to destroy India ,infact if modi was not here I guess there would have been a civil war between Hindus and the radical islam
@@raghavneema8849 first of all who told u I was Indian my parents are but I was born and brought up in the usa pls don't go to conclusion like that
@@raghavneema8849 welp India does not concern me
I don't agree with you because if there is successful democracy whether people are same religion , same language, same colour, same race . where people are so religious , where is no stable government .
Yeah right. Living in the Philippines my whole life, I can say for myself that democracy is not working for us anymore.