Blogging about Democracy

Can democracy bring stability to a society?

Democracy is a term commonly used to describe an ideal which promises to bring peace, prosperity and happiness to the citizens of a society. A democracy is a system in which the government is somewhat run by the people. But can it really bring stability to a society?

In this commentary, stability largely refers to social and economic stability only as stability is a vast concept which cannot be grappled fully and discussed easily.

I agree that democracy can bring stability to a certain extent. I feel that the degree of stability democracy can bring to a society depends on how the people respond to a certain measure, how educated they are etc. Generally it depends on the type of society itself.

It is of utmost importance to first define the criterias of democracy-what exactly constitutes democracy. Democracy allows freedom of expression from the media, the government and more importantly the citizens. It involves equal distribution of political power to the people, allowing them to have equal rights to influence the government’s decision-makings. A democracy also has a law which is formed on the consensus of the citizens and the government.

Freedom of expression in a democracy allows the preservation of everyone’s human rights. Preservation of human rights is very essential of a society nowadays, as seen from the recent outrage in Tibet where China stamped out its connection to the outside world and oppressed all expression of views from the people. This goes to show that if a society does not give everyone their deserved human rights, there would be no peace and harmony. On the other hand, democracy ensures these rights for the people, thus resulting in social stability. Also, with the citizens free to express their opinions, the government can gather valuable feedback and thus improve on the conditions of the society, bringing on great overall stability to it.

However, freedom of expression does not necessarily bring on stability. It may even destabilize the society. Owing to human nature, when many differing opinions clash together, it would result in sparks flying, and verbal fights would break out nationwide. A good example would be young and democratic Singapore in the 1960s. Free speech was allowed, resulting in many disagreements which fatally led on to riots. This would result in social instability, with everybody physically fighting and dead or injured bodies lying around in the streets. The internal conflicts would scare away potential overseas investors and thus economic would come to a standstill.

Equal distribution of political involvement for the citizens via voting, referendum etc, can stabilize the society. This is because the people can influence the government. The society will be run based on what the people want. Also, the government officials are well aware of the possibility of being voted out of office, thus they try to improve themselves to serve the population body better. This can bring on great stability to the society.

On the flip side, equal distribution of political involvement may result in a majority against minority scenario. This will result in tyranny. The minority will always lose out in terms of number of votes, thus will not be represented in the government. This will result in an outcry and unstable social stability. Also, we assume that human nature is “good”, and that they would not vote for absolutely absurd choices, like promoting racism etc. The citizens may not vote for the “correct” choice and the society would land in chaos.

Every democracy has a law which all must abide by. This will largely result in a socially stable condition.

In conclusion, democracy can bring stability to a society only if the various factors come together – well informed, educated and good natured citizens. If not, democracy would do little to aid in a society’s growth, and may even destabilize it for the worse.