Democracy is overhyped, it’s not really an adequate form of governance.

By design, democracy doesn’t really work as it’s been purported, politicians are often in office for terms of less than five years. So they find their duties regularly interrupted by elections that distract from the job of addressing long-​term policy challenges. As a result, politicians are naturally and rationally drawn to focus their efforts on seducing their electorates with short-​term sweeteners — including economic policies designed to quickly produce favorable monthly inflation, unemployment, and GDP numbers.

Voters generally favor policies that enhance their own well-​being with little consideration for that of future generations or for long-​term outcomes. Politicians are rewarded for pandering to voters’ immediate demands and desires, to the detriment of growth over the long term. Because democratic systems encourage such short-​termism, it will be difficult to solve many of the seemingly intractable structural problems slowing global growth without an overhaul of democracy. Democracy is a tool for gimmicks. Over 167 democracies and only a handful of them are admired. The rest are either mediocre or outright disasters.

USA is perhaps the most spectacular democratic shit show. I could go on and on about America’s democratic failures, but I’ll spare you.

India is another massive democratic shit show. Taiwan is a shit show, too.

Brazil, Hungary, Turkey, Venezuela, etc. They all have major problems with their democracies.

There is practically nothing to recommend Western liberal democracy. I can’t think of anything you can gain from it. Can you? Just that anybody could come up with any shitty opinion and will be allowed to go free.

The best form of government is political meritocracy as practiced by China. Is has helped them a lot to grow so powerful in the past 40years. Political leaders don’t just emerge from nowhere to assume political positions, they would have been scrutinized by the system and they know the long term objective of the society before assuming any political position. It’s easier to solve salient problems effectively this way.

I have always said this...

espn:
I have always said this...

Its not working, so obvious.
No democratic country has achieved more than China in the past 40years. Politics is like civil service, you earn every position and work hard to keep it else you lose your job.
Democracy brews corruption and political lobbying a lot. Obviously hasn’t been working for nations

Workch:
Its not working, so obvious.
No democratic country has achieved more than China in the past 40years. Politics is like civil service, you earn every position and work hard to keep it else you lose your job.
Democracy brews corruption and political lobbying a lot. Obviously hasn’t been working for nations

There are so many loopholes in the system...It is very easy for politicians and very rich people to manipulate the system...The rich gets richer at the expense of the poor masses....Under this system the judiciary is the most corrupt...They delay misinterpret and manipulate the law just to favour the rich...

Democracy is to me the right form of governance. I'm not against others like what China has or the Emirates but in democracy power is not concentrated in a few.
it gives the people choice to choose and put the chosen on the hot seat to perform. The only problem here is that the chosen want to remain in power so they must find a way to do so which in turn is corruption.
Can you with all honesty say that Buhari should remain as president for the next 50 years??
Another example, government was meant to be continuum, but because of the rotationary system of Democracy, we have changed it to opposition politics.
Buhari came in and scrap the social program of the GEJ administration only to spend a lot more money to create N-Power when both are design to do the same thing.
It's not only Buhari, it's what's holding Democracy back.

If you look critically at other systems that's "succeeding", it not necessarily the system per say but the choice of Leader that's making it a success.
Look at North Korea and China for example, one was making Labour so cheap to attract investment and once it became economically sound, start to build militarily. The other is spending all it's money to build militarily while it's economy is suffering.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar are now opening themselves to the world because of their new youthful royalty.


In conclusion, the system of government isn't necessarily as important as the people in government but I personally prefer Democracy.

emae009:
Democracy is to me the right form of governance. I'm not against others like what China has or the Emirates but in democracy power is not concentrated in a few.
it gives the people choice to choose and put the chosen on the hot seat to perform. The only problem here is that the chosen want to remain in power so they must find a way to do so which in turn is corruption.
Can you with all honesty say that Buhari should remain as president for the next 50 years??
Another example, government was meant to be continuum, but because of the rotationary system of Democracy, we have changed it to opposition politics.
Buhari came in and scrap the social program of the GEJ administration only to spend a lot more money to create N-Power when both are design to do the same thing.
It's not only Buhari, it's what's holding Democracy back.

If you look critically at other systems that's "succeeding", it not necessarily the system per say but the choice of Leader that's making it a success.
Look at North Korea and China for example, one was making Labour so cheap to attract investment and once it became economically sound, start to build militarily. The other is spending all it's money to build militarily while it's economy is suffering.
Saudi Arabia and Qatar are now opening themselves to the world because of their new youthful royalty.


In conclusion, the system of government isn't necessarily as important as the people in government but I personally prefer Democracy.

You are living in delusion if you think democracy, especially in developing countries is not autocracy by proxy.
What’s the essence of the flexible power when it doesn’t offer a real time benefit to the people? Uh

Politicians without any form of training can just come from no where to assume power just because they have funds. They do not know the nitty gritty of national operations, they come with derailing goals.

Mention any democratic country that is doing better than China in the past 40years? Just one

Workch:
You are living in delusion if you think democracy, especially in developing countries is not autocracy by proxy.
What’s the essence of the flexible power when it doesn’t offer a real time benefit to the people? Uh

Politicians without any form of training can just come from no where to assume power just because they have funds. They do not know the nitty gritty of national operations, they come with derailing goals.

Mention any democratic country that is doing better than China in the past 40years? Just one

You're the one in delusion when you're so close minded...
China has been around for thousands of years why ask about only the last 40years. When the so called West with rotten democracy was developing at rapid rate, where was China with the best form of governance??
You really believe that China system of government would work in a dynamic country like Nigeria.
Who would head of this government, which region will the leader come from? Maybe if you start from there you'd know about the complexity of the problem.
Qatar, UAE have been developing rapidly and they don't practice China's system of government, does that make it bad?

@Workch, I understand your confusion.
The fact is NO country operates democracy!
How come?

Well, democracy is an umbrella for some systems of government which emphasises wider participation of the populace and is unique to each country or jurisdiction.

Just as nobody studies a degree, they study medicine, engineering, management and so on.

Now to the "shit shows".
First, you didn't define what you mean by "shit show".
Either you did this deliberately to avoid scrutiny or you don't know what you are talking about.
Giving the examples of "shit show" you gave, I suppose your non-shitshow country
would be were there are no practical opposition or free dissenting voices.
This will include countries such as China,Russia, Iran, Saudi, and modern Venezuela.

I imagine you want a situation where a strong man seizes power, condemn and destroy all opposition and concentrate all powers to himself and cronies as the ideal form of government.
What if you end up among the "perfect" government's condemned by association, ethnicity or even geography?
How will you escape your fate?

emae009:


You're the one in delusion when you're so close minded...
China has been around for thousands of years why ask about only the last 40years. When the so called West with rotten democracy was developing at rapid rate, where was China with the best form of governance??
You really believe that China system of government would work in a dynamic country like Nigeria.
Who would head of this government, which region will the leader come from? Maybe if you start from there you'd know about the complexity of the problem.
Qatar, UAE have been developing rapidly and they don't practice China's system of government, does that make it bad?

Democracy is very recent too.
Political meritocracy practiced by China is more recent than democracy.

It seem to be working better, countries like Singapore, Japan and France all practice meritocracy, they seem to be doing better on the average than democratic governments in all scope of life.

ivolt:

@Workch, I understand your confusion.
The fact is NO country operates democracy!
How come?

Well, democracy is an umbrella for some systems of government which emphasises wider participation of the populace and is unique to each country or jurisdiction.

Just as nobody studies a degree, they study medicine, engineering, management and so on.

Now to the "shit shows".
First, you didn't define what you mean by "shit show".
Either you did this deliberately to avoid scrutiny or you don't know what you are talking about.
Giving the examples of "shit show" you gave, I suppose your non-shitshow country
would be were there are no practical opposition or free dissenting voices.
This will include countries such as China,Russia, Iran, Saudi, and modern Venezuela.

I imagine you want a situation where a strong man seizes power, condemn and destroy all opposition and concentrate all powers to himself and cronies as the ideal form of government.
What if you end up among the "perfect" government's condemned by association, ethnicity or even geography?
How will you escape your fate?

Meritocracy seem to be working better than democracy. You seem not be able to differentiate meritocracy from dictatorship

Democracy is delusional and full of gimmickry. The more you look, the less you see. No long term Value.

Meritocracy is not autocracy