Jerome's Commentaries

“Democracy can create stability in a society.” Discuss.

The fundamentals of a democracy encompass many properties; some of which include freedom and equality. I feel compelled to agree with the motion. But firstly, we have to define the subjective term of stability. I believe a stable country equates to a developing country.

However, the fact that Asian nations like Singapore were stabilised by authoritarian industrialists like Lee Kuan Yew, who tightly guided the local economy and political scene indicates that stability need not come only from democracy.

Democracy and development tend to complement each other. The political choices offered by democracy link to the social and economic choices offered by development. Choice, which is the freedom to determine one's destiny, is the characteristic of both democracy and development. This leads to the point that democracy creates stability in a society.

Democracy empowers the public to decide its leadership and trajectory of progress, thus protecting their basic rights. Take for example; Kuomintang Chief Ma Ying-jeou was recently elected as president in response to the corruptions under former president Chen Shui-bian. The ability in democratic systems to have smooth power transitions enhances renewal and public participation, thus promoting accountability and transparency. This, I feel, is one underlying factor why democracy creates stability in a society.

There doesn’t seem to have an obvious link between dictatorship and economic progress, or between democracy and poverty reduction. However, democracy is about the means used to achieve goals. Democratic values and processes imply peace, reconciliation, dialogue, consensus and, above all, intellectual and political choice. Looking at the former Yugoslavia and Soviet Union, we can logically assume that collapsed States have often tended to be authoritarian. While these states were formerly regarded as models of development, their intolerant rulers had failed to build consensus for political and economic liberalization, which lead to their disintegration.

Democracy implies concern about the means through which development takes place, without the great death tolls brought about and justified by dictators in the name of modernization. Poverty is only just about lack of resources. It obstructs free expression of political preferences, demands for a transparent government and better living standards. However, that does not mean that a rich nation is necessarily democratic or a poor country, undemocratic, but poverty eradication could contribute to the achievement of democracy.

However, a democratic country does not necessarily mean long-term stability. The stability of democracies does not depend on force, but on the consensus of the governed. This leads to the fact that consensus can only be forged through democracy. Tell me, what other forms of ruling allow for public participation? Looking back at the 1950s to 1990s, riots and demonstrations in many countries but caused greater destabilization in dictatorships.

A democracy that respects people’s rights is the most stable form of government, as its policies and decisions are always neutralised among all people. When there is a satisfied population, there is lesser dispute. Therefore I conclude that some forms of democracy, can indeed create stability.

500 Words