democracy, the right choice in all cases? Options

[*kryogenix*]

I don't think democracy is the best system to have in all cases. A classic example of this is Philippine democracy. It is worse than elementary school class elections. Anyone who starred in a movie is capable of winning the presidency. Already two popularly elected presidents have been ousted from power (it was almost three after last year).

The Philippines could use a good does of dictatorship. It's weird saying this, but a leader like Marcos (sans corruption) would probably do the country a whole lot of good.

Now, with Russia moving closer and closer to becoming a dictatorship, should we let Putin take control, or intervene somehow?

[acid_high]

I mean Demcracy has it flaws (look how did bush get elected twice) But I don't think a total dictatorship is key. Some people let power run to there head and then we get cases Like in cuba. Not that the U.S helped that workout any better than it did but you get my point

[Ington]

I mean Demcracy has it flaws (look how did bush get elected twice) But I don't think a total dictatorship is key. Some people let power run to there head and then we get cases Like in cuba. Not that the U.S helped that  workout any better than it did but you get my point

Er, the United States isn't really a democracy. We're more of a republic. I don't understand why people call it a democracy.

Democracy is impossibly with a large amount of people. It was wonderful in its origin, Athens, but thats because it only contained roughly 5,000 people. However, with a population such as in the United States, true democracy is impossible.

Thus, democracy is a completely unreasonable system (unless in a small population).

Note: In a true democracy, everyone takes part, on every issue. Nothing is between a citizen and the law. We have representatives for us, and we don't directly come in contact with anything but voting for leaders.