SS Discussion-3

"Democracy creates stability in society"

After looking through the previous arguements, i think that what is really important is the context of this question which we are discussing, the time, the people, the circumstances as well as the many other factors.

For example, we are all using different examples from different societies in this discussion, i feel that this is not very accurate. Singapore, Parkistan and Taiwan has major differences in their societies, so applying the idea of democracy in this 3 different countries and using the result to argue our way round definitely would not get us anywhere.

Furthermore, there are certain assumptions made. For example, it is assumed that people might all be illterate and that they might in turn choose the wrong path for the country should they be given the right to an uneducated vote. Also, it is assumed that there is a possibility of a unbiased patriotic person to choose a leader, even so, would his attributes be credible amongst the citizens. Compare an ruler who is average in terms of governing skills but is loved by his people and a ruler who is a lot of times more effecient but is hated by his people. Popularity does play a major role in the success of the ruler.

Taking the example of Chen Shui Bian, do we bash all form of democratically elected leader from one failure? If that is the case, is there any case of perfect system? And i am sure there are many more failed examples of communism, dictatorship etc. I.e. USSR and China to a certain extent.

Now all that aside, my arguement is along the line of basic citizen rights. As citizens of the country, we are the ones who make up the country. If we are unable to decide what we want for ourselves, what is the point of staying in that country? Would we want our lives to be under the control of others or have a say in it at least?

Furthermore, though minority could be right in circumstance, note that the country's policy is highly dependent on the heart of its citizens. Even with the right policies but with unconvinced majority of citizens, it would not work out. Whereas wont following the majority unify the country even if the road chose would be a tougher one?

I have raised many questions and doubts, so feel free to discuss. However, i must state that due to the vagueness of the term "society" and what conditions carries in it, we should not go giving specific examples since democracy could work for some circumstances but not others, that is definitely indisputable as it is not a perfect system. We should either define a proper and specific "society" OR argue along the general lines of society and go by generalisation, instead of minute detailed, single-countried examples. I.e. just because a small part of it is wrong does not mean it is wrong, it is admittedly imperfect but could still work under many circumstances.

Jin Fu (14) 3B