Location via proxy:   [ UP ]  
[Report a bug]   [Manage cookies]                
Scribd Logo
Upload

Welcome to Scribd!

  • 1K views

    A Strong Dictatorship Is Better Than A Weak Democracy (Merely A Persuasive Essay, Content Does Not Reveal Stance)

    Uploaded by

    Daph H.
    The document argues that a strong dictatorship is better than a weak democracy for three reasons: 1) weak democracies result in low-quality leaders being elected since most citizens are not well-informed about politics; 2) weak democracies are unstable due to limited power of leaders and competition between elites, while strong dictatorships are more stable and able to consistently implement reforms; 3) strong dictatorships allow citizens to focus on improvements in living standards rather than domestic politics. Examples of China's economic growth and poverty reduction under its single-party system are provided.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    A Strong Dictatorship Is Better Than A Weak Democracy (Merely A Persuasive Essay, Content Does Not Reveal Stance)

    Uploaded by

    Daph H.
    1K views2 pages
    The document argues that a strong dictatorship is better than a weak democracy for three reasons: 1) weak democracies result in low-quality leaders being elected since most citizens are not well-informed about politics; 2) weak democracies are unstable due to limited power of leaders and competition between elites, while strong dictatorships are more stable and able to consistently implement reforms; 3) strong dictatorships allow citizens to focus on improvements in living standards rather than domestic politics. Examples of China's economic growth and poverty reduction under its single-party system are provided.

    Original Title

    WSC writing

    Copyright

    © © All Rights Reserved

    Available Formats

    DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd

    Did you find this document useful?

    Is this content inappropriate?

    The document argues that a strong dictatorship is better than a weak democracy for three reasons: 1) weak democracies result in low-quality leaders being elected since most citizens are not well-informed about politics; 2) weak democracies are unstable due to limited power of leaders and competition between elites, while strong dictatorships are more stable and able to consistently implement reforms; 3) strong dictatorships allow citizens to focus on improvements in living standards rather than domestic politics. Examples of China's economic growth and poverty reduction under its single-party system are provided.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    1K views2 pages

    A Strong Dictatorship Is Better Than A Weak Democracy (Merely A Persuasive Essay, Content Does Not Reveal Stance)

    Uploaded by

    Daph H.
    The document argues that a strong dictatorship is better than a weak democracy for three reasons: 1) weak democracies result in low-quality leaders being elected since most citizens are not well-informed about politics; 2) weak democracies are unstable due to limited power of leaders and competition between elites, while strong dictatorships are more stable and able to consistently implement reforms; 3) strong dictatorships allow citizens to focus on improvements in living standards rather than domestic politics. Examples of China's economic growth and poverty reduction under its single-party system are provided.

    Copyright:

    © All Rights Reserved
    Download as DOCX, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
    Download as docx, pdf, or txt
    You are on page 1of 2

    A Strong Dictatorship Is Better Than a Weak Democracy

    (Merely a persuasive essay, content does not reveal stance)

    A dictatorship is an authoritarian type of office or government where there is


    absolute control by one person. In other words, the dictator has total power and rules
    everything.Meanwhile, a democracy is a form of government that empowers the
    people to exercise political control, limits the power of the head of state,
    provides for the separation of powers between governmental entities, and
    ensures the protection of natural rights and civil liberties. A strong
    dictatorship is indeed better than a weak democracy, for its ability to bring the
    majority together, providing the country a sustainable future.

    Democracy is ineffective by nature. ‘People are involved in politics in forms


    such as voting for a candidate, they vote for the candidate that suits their
    needs, therefore it is beneficial for the citizens. ‘This is what some people
    might argue as if weak democracy is superior to a strong
    dictatorship.However, a problem with a political system involved with these
    people, mostly ordinary citizens , is that they are not entirely informed to
    choose a candidate that really benefits them. According to a study in the
    United States, less than 30% of the people can name two or more of the rights
    listed in the First Amendment of the Bill of Rights, one of the most
    fundamental of the Amendments! People do not understand, nor do they care
    about their country’s politics as much as they claimed to. Thus, they choose
    their candidates without much concern, or worse, without a valid reason.The
    politician that is picked out by them, has low quality. Like Donald Trump, who
    disregards experts on pandemic science .How could people even trust such
    mediocre governors to solve their problems? A strong dictatorship does not
    tolerate such low efficacy on repeat, therefore it is better than a weak
    democracy.

    Besides, a weak democracy is unstable . The power of the head of the state is
    limited, meaning that it may not be able to control certain crucial affairs of
    citizens and further, its political rivals and corporations. In the case of the
    Kyrgyz Republic , a certified fragile democracy according to
    freepolicybriefs.org , there is weak bureaucratic support in its economic
    development, causing heated competitions between elite groups. This caused a
    draw in the economic reforms, making the issue unnecessarily
    complicated.Citizen’s lives can’t be improved, resulting in dissatisfaction with
    the government, increased risks of instability.A strong dictatorship, however,
    is comparably more stable and predictable.Like China, which is ruled by a
    single party . China managed to carry out short term, long term reforms and
    policies as promised. In 2020, China managed to bring 850million people out
    of poverty according to South China Morning Post . If China was in a weak
    democratic situation like the Kyrgyz republic, the reforms wouldn’t have been
    carried out efficiently due to a lack of direction and responsibility. More
    people’s living situation is improved, less complaints and protests.

    This brings to my last point, a strong dictatorship, if benevolent, can free


    people from worrying about domestic political affairs and focus on the good
    sides of different policies . People say that a strong dictatorship uses
    propaganda and idealism to stabilize rule. Therefore in this way, people are
    comforted by such positivism and have more faith in the nation. With the
    addition of a political system which does not require citizens to participate,
    people can just relax and let politics play out by themselves.

    In conclusion, a strong dictatorship is definitely better than a weak


    democracy. This essay has proven the point by addressing the weakness of the
    basic concept of democracy, compared the stability of dictatorship and
    democratic countries, and provided a social advantage of strong dictatorship.

    You might also like