Critiques of Democracy

Democracy is evident where the citizens and the leaders alike can criticize the leadership in a country. In many of the cases, some would argue that the system is inclusive and open to question. In various cases, democracy works better than dictatorship. However, recently, right-wing nationalist populism is negatively affecting democracy in western countries. The system where Plato argues that democracy gives too much freedom with little knowledge. The critic can be useful for democracy, where it points out to the negative and suggest better corrective methods. 

Critique of Democracy

There is always a call for democracy as it is for criticism of government techniques and tools used by the democratic government inside and outside boundaries. The United States government has a democratic system with the citizens not having the knowledge of the tools or the information in making informed decisions on the government’s public policy issues.  The United States, in this criticism, is obscuring information from the citizens that they move by the mass and not by the logical sense. Gilley (2009) indicates that the democracies are not feasible because of the stupidity of the people and the propaganda and power differences of the leader.

Conversely, critique on democracy comes with the government rule on imposing rules to the countries beyond their borders. The act is more of an imperialist that the government has on areas they feel have a problem and through the military forces their democracy (Conversi, 2008). The critique questions the United States part of democracy in making the other undemocratic states bow to the democratic antiques through military might and economic means.

Relation of Critiques to Governance and Public Policy

The government talking of equality or the representation through the representative election may not result in democracy. Santas (2007) indicates that contempt in public policy of the representative would be in contempt, giving a false impression on how close they care for the people to get their way. After the representative leaves, they take their cause and forget about the pleas. The people always lack the full information to make the logical decision on the choices and the making of the public policy. The manipulation by the representatives or politicians reduces the chances of democracy (Santas, 2007). Where there is manipulation attaining real democracy may not be possible since the choices made by the public will depend on false grounds. Moreover, public policies will be made on the needs and interests of the politicians.

On the governance, Conversi (2008) indicates that where democracy expands, nationalism and ethnic conflict expands.  The United States, on several occasions, used the threats by the military and economic sanctions to deal with the undemocratic countries, the case in Libya, and North Korea and Mexico. The US-style democracy, therefore, does not support the other countries but only rises to global conflicts.

Valid and Constructive Critique

On the point of public policy, the united manipulation on the citizens can be helpful (Rostbøll, 2009). For example, in the case of intelligence mining of information for the protection of the country against terrorism, the public was prevented from having the information in making logic choices. The move by the US government on the provision of information and other details by the nationals mentioned being on a project for an interception against terrorists. However, for matters of national security, the government did not lay bare information on how the mining of the information is done.

The imperialistic move on the weaker and undemocratic countries can be justified. For example, the continuous conflicts and wars in Syria, Afghanistan, Pakistan, and Iran lead to destruction. The stalemate of the use of some destructive weapons like the ambition of Iran to launch nuclear weapons puts these countries in collision with democratic countries (Rostbøll, 2009). The use of weapons of mass destruction is like engaging in terrorism by proxy, and therefore, the democratic countries should take the initiative for the stalemate of the process, the same case with the terrorist Osama bin laden in which the US used the military in attacking the group and killing the leader.

Invalid and Destructive Critique

Democratic states sometimes use tools and techniques that are used incomplete in undemocratic states. The war on boundaries has always been a problem for the United States and Mexico. The invalidity and destruction of some democracy critique are because they yearn for democracy. Some of the practices by some countries such as China and Cuba are not only destructive but also eliminate forcefully democratic governance. 9/11, war on terror, and the American sanction on Muslims are some examples of destructive democracy critique. Conversi (2008) states that the US-style globalization not only facilitates global conflicts and wars but also war within its boundaries, thus a form of war itself.  The countries that fail to partake in the United States globalization are a target of military aggression or marginalization.

For public policy, the people voting are always influenced by politicians. In many democratic countries, people vote along ethnic lines or easily swayed by the leaders. In the recent election, most of the Trump voters were the republicans who needed to have the natives have control of the country. However, most promises do not always come as people wait for promises that are yet to be fulfilled (Rostbøll, 2009). The other example is the vote for a minimum wage by citizens without knowledge of the implications of the rising in unemployment.

Evaluation of the Critiques

The critiques have the positive and the negative. However, it leans more on the negatives. From the argument of Plato, democracy gives too much freedom with less knowledge. Democracy has always had the praise of many and more criticisms. While democracy should have been self-fulfilling where the rules form on transparency and honesty, it has been reduced to a tool by the leaders to dupe the society into having their needs and interests served (Bexell, Tallberg, & Uhlin, 2010). In almost all democratic countries, cases of leaders using public resources for self-gains have been on the rise. It would not be appropriate for having wars in other countries, but there should be a diplomatic solution.

Conclusion

Democracy is progressive and self-serving.  The critique in the democratic gives it the meaning and offers freedom with it. The government allows dissent, and the criticism helps in learning and coming up with the solution to the underlying problems. Though in a democracy, the decisions can be dividing, the better solution to that will be the population having the knowledge and rational than having the overhaul in democracy.

Reference

Bexell, M., Tallberg, J., & Uhlin, A. (2010). Democracy in global governance: The promises and pitfalls of transnational actors. Global Governance, 81-101.

Conversi, D. (2008). Democracy, nationalism and culture: A social critique of liberal monoculturalism. Sociology Compass, 2(1), 156-182.

Gilley, B. (2009). Is democracy possible? Journal of Democracy, 20(1), 113-127.

Rostbøll, C. F. (2009). Dissent, criticism, and transformative political action in deliberative democracy. Critical Review of International Social and Political Philosophy, 12(1), 19-36.89.Santas, G. (2007). Plato’s Criticisms of Democracy in the Republic. Social Philosophy and Policy, 24(2), 70-