Essay: Democracies stand out as superior forms of leadership

Democracy is a term that denotes a form of governance in which the ruling power is provided and determined by the people. The Greek term loosely translates to ‘rule of the people,’ and one of the common definitions of term is ‘rule of the people by the people for the people.’ In modern governance, the term denotes various forms of governance in which the citizenry exercises direct power or through elected representatives from among the people who form the government as bodies of parliament or senate. In some cases, democracy is also referred to as “the rule of the majority.” In essence, this is a system of governance in which outcomes of decisions are dependent on participants and not forces of individuals or single entities. In a nutshell, democracy can be defined in many ways, but this system of governance is characterized by the rule of law, political freedom, and legal equality, all of which are hallmarks of democracy.
How Democracy Runs
A democratic form of governance is based on the collective decisions of the people that are governed. As such, it is also termed as self-governance. All members of a democratic system are offered a chance to express their personal opinions on various issues through the power of voting, and each member is entitled to one vote, which is equal to any other member’s vote (Clark, 2017). Therefore, decisions made in such forms of governance are arrived at through voting, and because all individual votes are equal, the majority of votes represent the common will of the majority, and that which is favored by many becomes legal. In order for democracies to run there are a few elements that have to be present and one of the most important factors is equality. All members of a democratic society must be regarded as being equal and this equality must be present in everyone’s vote for democracy to be functional (Clark, 2017). Apart from fostering equality, there is a need for all to be properly informed to weigh their options and be given an equal chance to vote in order for democracy to function (Clark, 2017). The US has been the epitome of success in terms of democracy, but it is good to note its governance has not always been strictly democratic because Clark states that “…in the U.S., groups have been disenfranchised from the right to vote (Clark, 2017).” This is actually true considering that in the past white wealthy men with land were the only ones allowed to vote. However, with time voting was opened to black men and women with time, and finally all eligible people by age in the mid 1990s when the National Voter Registration Act was enacted (Clark, 2017). Democracies are of different types and they work in subtly differing ways, but they can generally be divided into two major types – direct and representative democracy (The Saylor Foundation, 2017).
Direct Democracy: In a direct democracy all power is placed in the hands of the individual citizen. In such governance, all people must be called to contribute by voting whenever a decision needs to be made. As such, there are no intermediaries for the polity and all people are regarded as equals with an equal chance to influence decisions in policy formulation. But as stated by the Saylor Foundation (2017), “in practice…this system is hard to implement.” This is perhaps due to the fact that is virtually impossible to always vote on every other decision that comes by and needs to be made.
Representative Democracy: Representative democracy is the second most used form of democracy in the world. This democratic arrangement of governance allows for the creation of a government in which the polity votes in their chosen individual or group representatives who form assemblies such as parliaments or senate bodies in which the groups make decisions on behalf of the citizens whom they represent. The number of representatives chosen is often determined by the number of the people to be represented. However, it is good to note that this form of democracy diminishes individual power to some extent (The Saylor Foundation, 2017).
Democracies can also be typified as either parliamentary or presidential systems. The parliamentary systems are distinct because they place or vest more power in the parliaments are organs of representation. In such democracies more power is vested in the legislative branch of the government often made of a parliament. This system is evidenced in nations such as the UK and Germany. On the other hand, the presidential democratic system vests more power in the presidency. These systems concentrate much of their power in the executive, and they tend to be more stable than the parliamentary systems. A good example of this system can be seen in the USA and South and Central American nations (The Saylor Foundation, 2017).
Apart from the presidential and parliamentary systems, there are also nations that exercise mixed democratic systems. These are types of democracies that do not fit into either group and which notably adopt elements of both systems in their governance to varying extents (The Saylor Foundation, 2017).
Positive Elements about Democracy
Democracy is often touted as the standard of best leadership, and this may be attested to by the fact that it is the most common form of governance practiced across the globe. Democracy has numerous advantages that make it a superior form of governance when compared to other forms of governance. In order to bring out a clear picture on this, the merits of democracy as a form of governance will be highlighted and later on compared to fascism, which is also a form of governance, but which is inconsistent with democracy.
Perhaps the first advantage of democracy is that it allows the voices of all people to be heard on issues that affect them. Common people have room to join parties, lobby groups, make demonstrations and petition for various issues as long as this is done within the legal framework of the constitution and this ensures that everyone has a chance to be heard through such forums or finally at the ballot (Green Garage, 2017).
Democracy promotes equality like no other form of governance and it ensures that the interests of all people are protected through their rights to vote, petition, demonstrate, and picket (APECSEC, 2015).  The polity has the right to vote on economic, social and political issues of all kinds as well as the people to represent them in dealing with such matters and this chance safeguards them against having to undergo circumstances that they disagree with in policy formulation (APECSEC, 2015). Democracy is also designed to work against inequality and foster inclusivity. As such, it is the best system to fight inequality and enhance inclusivity (APECSEC, 2015).
Democratic leadership is known to foster political, economic, and social stability as well as responsibility because of its inclusivity. The fact that everyone is allowed to participate as an informed individual ensures that citizens take charge of matters that affect their life, and the fact that everyone has a chance to participate negates the possibility of divisions where some people may claim to have been sidelined (APECSEC, 2015).  Issues are often thoroughly discussed by all stakeholders in democracies and representatives are held responsible by their community of voters and this improves responsibility and stability in leadership.
Democracy also fosters positive change in governance and leadership where everyone can be involved to make changes in leadership instead of a few powerful people that may have wealth (plutocracy) or military might that can enable them to change leadership through violent means (APECSEC, 2015). Additionally, in most modern democracies, leaders cannot stay in power for long because constitutions make provisions for intermittent leadership changes, which prevent the development of dictatorship. For instance, in the USA a president only holds office for a maximum of two terms, and this implies people can anticipate change and get a chance to change their leadership every now and then (Green Garage, 2017). This also means that people have a chance to do away with non-performing leaders and replace them with those perceived to be better, and the presence of multiple political parties also guarantees that people will have many leaders to choose from as they wish (Green Garage, 2017).
Democracy also helps in creating good citizens and gives them a feeling of being obligated towards their governance. In a state where people do not choose their leaders the polity is likely to be indifferent to leadership and to care less about leadership and more so good leadership. However, in a democracy citizens find that they have to analyze the candidates and political parties as well as political issues that concern their governance in order to vote wisely. This improves the quality of citizenship and the polity becomes more aware of governance. This helps in imparting political education and the system serves as an idea training school for citizens who later take up active roles in determining their governance (Green Garage, 2017). In fact the Asia-Pacific Economics Blog puts it rightly as follows, “…this political system seems to function as the first school for good citizenship, where individuals can learn about their rights and duties from birth to the time of death (Green Garage, 2017).”
In spite of democracy being the best or rather the top-rated kind of governance, the system is not without fault. There are various challenges that plague the system and threaten to make it less effective and efficient such as voter apathy and the possibility of vote rigging and manipulation of elections, which may bring out outcomes that are not a true representative of the people’s opinion and choice. In reiterating this fact, the Asia-Pacific Economics Blog states that, “…while it is renowned as one of the most efficient government systems ever, it is not without flaws (APECSEC, 2015).”
Contrasting Fascism’s Negative Aspects versus Democracy’s Merits
In order to have a clear understanding of the superiority of democracy as a form of governance, here is a brief comparative review of democracy when related to fascism, which is almost an exact opposite of democracy, and which is against democratic principles. In contrast to democracy, fascism is a form of governance that promotes nationalism at the costs of all other things. The term fascism originates from the term ‘fascio,’ which is an Italian tern that means a group of people (Szalay, 2017). Under fascism, the common goals of the nation determined by the leadership of a few are the priority and they overshadow all individual needs or opinions. As such, living under fascism is akin to living under a dictatorship where individual freedoms are limited. Fascism has numerous disadvantages, but the fact that the system can be efficient in some aspects such as decision-making does not escape any analytical eye. In fact, Morton (2016) states that, “one of the major advantages of a fascist state is the ability of its leaders to enact laws much more quickly than in other systems of government (Morton, 2016).” But fascism has its own demerits that have made it least applicable and in fact obsolete in modern times.
Demerits of fascism as compared to democratic leadership
Fascism has no respect for international and individual rights of the citizens, who seem to be mere workers working towards the attainment of the nation’s common goals, which are highly regarded in fascism where the nation comes before the polity (Morton, 2016). Leaders in such a system operate on a slippery slope where human rights could be easily trampled upon and recklessly abandoned at the discretion of the leaders. The system also considers some small portion of the population as being more important than others – the leading class. Such a class is likely to trample on the rights of others to further their selfish interests at the expense of the citizenry. According to Szalay (2017) fascists hold “the belief that individualism and liberalism enable dangerous decadence and have a negative effect on the group (Szalay, 2017). This is quite contrary to democracy where individual rights are respected and liberalism and individualism are highly upheld (Anonymous, n.d).
Fascism often leads to disregard for international laws and the upholding of human rights. The international laws and rights standards as they are right now do not conform to fascist standards of leadership. In most cases, fascism often makes states uncooperative at the international level because they believe that they have a superior right over their course than the international goals that may be jointly charted by groups of nations (Morton, 2016). Contrastingly, democracy is likely to allow states under its leadership to cooperate and make joint decisions because it relies on the principle of equal participation and equality aimed at fostering good for all (Anonymous, n.d).
The last and perhaps most important disadvantage is that apart from failing to respect individual and human rights, fascism has failed the test of time because it upholds an unacceptable ideology that has no respect for the right of people to chart their path and future in life. There is currently no nation practicing fascism, but democracy is vibrant across the globe and this is sufficient proof that fascism is irrelevant and inapplicable in current times (Morton, 2016: Anonymous, n.d).
Conclusion
In comparison to virtually all forms of governance, democracies stand out as superior forms of leadership because they promote equality, individual rights, respect for liberalism and individuality and the right for people to determine their life and make choices based on their preferences. In addition, democracies provide the best governance because they provide the most checks and balances that protect the rights of the polity and even the weak against being trampled upon by the wealthy or majority. The Sayor Foundation (2017) holds that, “There is no perfect democracy,” but it is arguably true that democracy is the best option among others because in the words of Gillen (2011), democracy is better because it “…is fairer and it establishes and protects freedom of the people as individuals and as a nation (Gillen, 2011).