In a democratic nation, power can easily be transferred from one party to the other amicably through voting. The power of ruling and governance, therefore, comes from the electorates. The residents of nations that are lucky to exercise this kind of democracy have great advantages over others in nations governed by other forms of governance. A government that has been elected through a democratic process allows for other aspiring governments to try their luck at leadership upon the completion of their term in office (Manali par. 5). Democracy also gives people a sense of participation in their governance. They have the feeling that they are recognized as citizens of the nation and that their voice and opinions matter (Government of Sweden par. 2). The challenge to the leaders, therefore, is to provide good leadership and governance to reciprocate the good work of the voters. Leaders should be held politically accountable for their actions. Moreover, in a democratic culture, gender equality, as well as respect and tolerance for all individuals and groups, are exercised. There are also functioning political parties, independent media, and active Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) as well as private institutions which operate freely. Arising differences and conflicts are also dealt with peacefully. On the other hand, democracy is not always a success and its lack does not imply the failure of a nation. Countries such as Iran who do not practice democracy are still governed well. They are even much better than countries which practice democracy since the citizens of such countries may not be well aware of the political scenarios in their countries hence they may end up making the wrong choices during elections. According to Manali, the fact that a democratic system of government allows for the conduction of elections after a constitutionally stipulated period could imply that the incumbent government emphasizes more on short-term goals, at the expense of long-term objectives that would serve the interest of the electorate. Walter Williams, in response to the call of President Bush for Iraq to become a democracy, says, “I can’t think of a worse place to have democracy. Iraq needs a republic… [With] decentralized and limited government power… in Iraq if a majority-rule democracy emerges, given the longstanding hate and mistrust among ethnic/religious groups, it’s a recipe for conflict” (Williams par. 5). Williams suggests that Iraq should adopt the cantonal system of government as practiced in Switzerland. There are various ethnic groups within Switzerland. For a long time, the various ethnic groups had been entangled in a conflict about their governance. In a bid to cultivate a lasting solution amongst the warring factions, the government of Switzerland allowed them to self-govern themselves. In effect, the warring factions were bale to live amicably.
Even as democracy may be hailed as the best form of government, nonetheless, the system has its fair share of disadvantages, such as leaders who lose focus on the need to prioritize the long-term goals of their country’s development at the expense of their political survival. Whereas a democratically elected creates a sound environment for the private sector, the media and NGOs, however, there are totalitarian states that have enjoyed this status for years and are an envy of many.
Works Cited
Government of Sweden. Democracy and good governance. Ministry of foreign affairs. 2006. Web.
Manali, Oak. Advantages and disadvantages of democracy. Buzzle.com. 2010. Web.
Williams, Walter. Don’t wish democracy on anyone, Creators syndicate. 2006. Web.