Edwin

I think we are digressing. Lets go back to the topic on "Democracy".

In summary, we have the following points:

• Democracy creates stability as people have an equal chance to elect a leader of their choice to lead them, thus allowing the majority to be satisfied.
• It is a choice of a system to maintain stability to a certain extent rather than having no system at all, which would cause more chaos.

And:

• However, the minority of the citizens would be unsatisfied, since there can only be one leader elected from many candidates, which is still significant enough to cause chaos.
• There are other systems available which might be more effective in maintaining stability in a society.

Therefore, I conclude that democracy might not be able to create stability in a society. Theoratically speaking, democracy gives a fair and equal chance to everybody in a society to vote for the leader which they think is the most ideal. However, the can only be one victor among the many candidates standing for election. This would therefore definitely cause tension among the people supporting the winning candidate and the people supporting the other candidates.

Ryan

Off-hand, I can think of one example where communism does not really create stability and in fact, worsens the situation.

North Korea is a country where communism is implemented. However, the citizens there are not very rich. They have just enough to get on with their lives everyday. Since the government is the only leader in the country, they get to decide on most of the decisions regarding the nation. This would not be "following the rules of communism": where every person is equal and have equa status!

Jerry

Yes. But is democracy the only system in which we can create stability in a society? No! There are other forms of systems that can enable order. For example, communism.

According to http://m-w.com/, the definition of communism is:
"a theory advocating elimination of private property b: a system in which goods are owned in common and are available to all as needed."

Everyone would be equal. In theory, this would be the most ideal system as everyone has equal rights and status, so there will not have many reasons to fight amongst each other.

Jerry

That is true Ryan. But think of it this way: what would happen if there wasn't any system or order in a society at all? Wouldn't there be chaos, one that is worse than if democracy was not implemented?

There will be no one to lead the nation, and when great disaster strikes, people would not know what to do! It will be very chaotic.

Ryan

However, on the other sound of the coin, there is a minority of unhappy citizens! This would still leave a chance of revolt. The minority, although small, is still considered significant and may cause an "uproar", if they go too far.

Political parties that really want the position of power may go to great heights to criticise the current leader.

Democracy, although it allows the majority to be happy, it also allows a significant number of citizens to be unhappy, thus it does not create stability in a society.

Jerry

Yes, I think that democracy does indeed create stability in the society. As what you say, democracy allows the people in a society to have the right to have a say in choosing leaders of their society. This promotes utilitarianism as everybody is happy since they they have the right to support the candidates which they prefer.

Edwin

Let us first start by defining the term democracy.

From http://m-w.com/, the definition of decmocracy is:
"a government by the people; especially : rule of the majority b: a government in which the supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodically held free elections."

Based on this definition, I agree that democracy creates stability in a society.