“Democracy creates about stability in a society”

“Democracy creates about stability in a society”

A textbook definition of democracy would be a government system whereby the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representations and has political beliefs of liberalism and equality. However, a more relevant and simpler explanation of democracy would be through what we experience frequently in our lives. If you put democracy into the context of a classroom, you will get class chairman candidates, voting, campaign speeches to gather votes and an eventual chairman who has won the most votes. Of course, this is not all that is to democracy, but the key ideas are represented perfectly.

A stable society is one where the three aspects of social stability, political stability and economic stability are achieved and that there is generally healthy people development. Social stability ensures the well being of the people and having minimal violent conflicts. Political stability is the people’s contentment with the government and having minimal violent political struggles or objections. Economic stability refers to having a strong economy free from poverty. Without any one of these aspects, a society cannot be stable. Would you consider a rich and developed country but with riots and fighting frequently a stable society?

Firstly, democracy decreases the percentage of discontented people through the process of voting, which satisfies the majority, as the result will be what the majority had desired. Secondly, democracy empowers the people to make the decisions and makes the people responsible for their choices, which in turn ensures that the government are not able suppress issues. Thirdly, the process of election and the multi party system ensures that the people have the power of choice, and it will maintain competition and competency of the leaders through selection. These aspects contribute to creating political stability in the society. All these components are unique to democracy, and are not present in other political system such as authoritarianism. This is because democracy is based on freedom and choice, while systems such as authoritarianism does not have such political values, and the power falls on the elite leaders solely. Democracy thus creates contentment of the majority amongst the people and political choice, which creates political stability, while authoritarianism might fail to do so when in comparison.

However, people might abuse the freedom they get. They might take the freedom for granted and not as a privilege, and demonstrate their rights to freedom by demanding what they want through means of riots. The parties running for the elections may also use means such as empty promises and the media to influence the people’s choice, but fail to lead the country competently as promised, after winning the elections. Therefore, the two political values of choice and freedom may backfire in a democratic society and cause political instability instead. When we compare this with authoritarianism again, we realise that the problem is absent as the people do not have the freedom and choice to do either of the two actions, which eliminates any chances of this problem.

A political system also affects the economic and social stability of society. In today’s world, most highly developed countries are democratic while most of the poorer countries are authoritarian, but democracy is not necessary for development. In collapsed states such as Yugoslavia, the common cause of their downfall is the inability of the leader to build a consensus for political and economic liberalization, while in democracy; the government has to be transparent and accountable for their policies. Also, the political choices offered by democracy complements the economic choices of development. These means that while political systems may not be the sole factor to a society's economic stability, it can play an important part as seen in democracy in promoting economic stability in the society.

The political choice in democracy complements the social choice of development and stability too. The political stability also directly leads to social stability by satisfying the majority, which reduces reason for trouble making. Also, freedom of choice and speech in democracy encourages people to solve things peacefully instead of organizing riots. In the case of an authoritarian system, probably the most effective way of trying to implement a change in the government by the people is through a revolt if the government refuses to listen to the people. On the other hand, democracy allows the people to have a say in decision making, which reduces any need for violent protests or revolts in other to impose a change in the government, but uses a referendum for any suggestions of change that the people want. Trading violence for simply a referendum, would that not create social stability?

In conclusion, democracy creates stability as its ideals cater to the people’s desire, which, in turn, makes the people allow stability to set in. However, like all political systems, democracy is a double-edged sword. Democratic values cater to the people desires of freedom and choice, but they might backfire and cause more protests and riots instead, through the wrong image of the values. Also, it is impossible for true democracy as the minority is always on the losing end in the case of voting. True democracy should take the minority into account, but voting creates a kind of “majority rule” tyranny. As an extreme example of this, if all the people in a society votes to take all your possession without reason, you will have no choice but to follow them as it would be millions against one, regardless of the morality concerned here. Even when limited democracy is introduced to limit the issues where democracy can be applied, it might solve this problem but then, true democracy will not be achieved. Therefore, my conclusion is that democracy can create stability in a society, but is not a flawless political system. However, it is still a relatively effective political system in creating stability as compared to the other systems.