The Instigator
or8560
Con (against)
Losing
44 Points
The Contender
yoon172
Pro (for)
Winning
72 Points

Is democracy the best type of government there is?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/8/2007 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,784 times Debate No: 168
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (38)

 

or8560

Con

I do not think that democracy is the best type of government there is. Look at our society, there are corruptions, leaders that don't do their jobs well. And look at the ancient countries such as Rome. They didn't have democracy, and they became one of the most powerful nations in the history of the world. Also look at nations such as Soviet Union. They did a lot of killing, but beside from that there were many good things about it.
yoon172

Pro

I believe that democracy is the best government there is. people use the term "democracy" as shorthand for liberal democracy, which may include additional elements such as political pluralism, equality before the law, the right to petition elected officials for redress of grievances, due process, civil liberties, human rights, and elements of civil society outside the government. This gives people the freedom of speech which will include the freedom to vote to all the people.
Debate Round No. 1
or8560

Con

They say that democracy is a type of government where the majority rules. When majority rules, there can be a lot of mistakes such as electing a wrong person for a leader etc...... I think that a small number of wise, intelligent, fair people would be much better than leaving people's destiny to a system called democracy, where a larger number of people rules, and a small number of people is ignored, and let them be alone.
yoon172

Pro

Back in history, there was monarchy. As you know a monarchy includes the king. However, some glitches in history tells us about he tryants who ruled and slaughted the peasants. They can be tryants or just plain idiots to be determined to be strong. Democracy can change all that because democracy does not include one person controling the whole government. Instead, a group of minds work together peacefully to rule a country. Communism is another failure. An example is the north korean lead kim jong ill. He is an idiot who wants all the good stuff for himself and does not care about he suffering people.
Debate Round No. 2
or8560

Con

But, there were good kings such as King Sejong (세종) who invented hangel (한글) and cared for peasants and was fair and intelligent. And look at our current President No. He's nothing but an ugly stupid president compared to King Sejong. There were kings like Elizabeth 1st who is a very respected monarchy in England. She was a great ruler and she defeated the Spain Armada and made a good start of a nation which will become the most biggest and the strongest empire in the world which conquered many of the world's territory. I'm not saying that conquering Asians were good, but they were good for her people.
yoon172

Pro

yoon172 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by mikaelthemycologist 8 years ago
mikaelthemycologist
1. or8560, you said that if we have a monarchy will will have good leaders, such as Elizabeth 1st of England. You seem to omit the other possibilities, which you frequently do in your debates. What if we get an idiot who rules the country? You seem to only state the good Queens and Kings, when there where many bad ones.

2. You said that the President we have is an idiot, and democracy made him win. I agree with you that he is an idiot, but many believe that he cheated in the election. In that case democracy did not make him win.

3. You said "I think that a small number of wise, intelligent, fair people would be much better than leaving people's destiny to a system called democracy, where a larger number of people rules, and a small number of people is ignored, and let them be alone." How will we select the "small number of wise, intelligent, fair people"? Oh, of course, we wont select them. That means that they will have to select themselves, creating a monarchy were people kill each other over power. Unless, we the people select them, which is a democracy.
Posted by C-Mach 9 years ago
C-Mach
First of all, we are not a democracy. We are a republic with democratically elected representatives. And for all of you who said Bush cheated in the election, there's something called the Electoral College (An assembly of representatives to determine who won the presidency).
Posted by gokorea 9 years ago
gokorea
hey daniel, i am jane...
but do I have to debate with you???
I don't want to, though.. -_-
oh..well...
what topic do you want to debate about,then??
oh yeah, just to tell ya.. my id is, as you can know, gokorea-so weird,huh??
anyway.. bye for now.. and see ya tomorrow at Samboh!!
Posted by paul_tigger 9 years ago
paul_tigger
To: Ineffablesquirrel

Well I completely disagree with you. You are being a relativists by saying one should do which they think is relative to them. What too busy with family and friends? Then why are you here? You are being inconsiderate of the other person's time and energy. Yes, one should always judge on merit and I am not saying that one should win or lose because they forfeit a round but when two people are debating and it appears that they are equally about the same, then factors like a forfeit should be considered. Most people it appears seem to vote from their subjectivity rather than looking at it from an objective perspective.
Posted by Korezaan 9 years ago
Korezaan
Double loss. There was so much both of you could've said.
Posted by LbarnettIV 9 years ago
LbarnettIV
Democracy has its merrits and failings. In the modern context, or as related to the United States of America. The ignorance of the populace seems be taking us down a path toward despotism. Democracy seems to have put us on a coarse to become what most Americans would fear the most. As the roles of the federal and state governments expand, a little more of our freedom and liberty are taken from us. While the manner in which we have allowed these tyrants to come to power is democratic without question. the manners in which they begin force themselves into the lives of citizens is increasingly despotic.
Posted by Leonitus_Trujillo 9 years ago
Leonitus_Trujillo
Democracy is not the best form of government because leaders do not have enough power to exercise powerful enough positive changes that can truly benefit the country. I take the Dominican Republic for example.
They have an Executive, Legislative and Judicial branch , and all three of them are corrupt. Per chance that you do have an excellent ruler in the D.R. all the constitutional checks and balances and safeguards are working against him, ranging from corruption Justices in the Supreme court to bought out votes in the (DR) House of Representatives and senates. For heavens sake the congress voted down a bill that would work to reduce bureaucratic corruption...what a coincidence huh? Then in order to give people some rights in that country you'd have to actually take them away which is something Democracy does not allow.
To give them the right to walk down the street with the security that they will not be robbed, you would need to enforce curfews and subject them to search and seizers, and at times discard the rite of habias corpus. Democracy is very good when things are working great, but when they are not it is the worst government because one person can be opposed by everything that the Democracy protects.
However in a dictatorship if leadership is bad, the country suffers (just like a democracy) but if the Leader is good , no matter who came before or will come after, or who does what the country will be successful. We look at examples such like the ones previously mentioned and also Friedrich the Great of Prussia a monarch who struggled his whole life to be the "first servant of the state", a vastly enlightened leader who loved his people.
In many cases absolute power can do absolute good, not just absolute corruption. In an authoritarian you can have one corrupt person , in a democracy you can have fields. Positive change in a Democracy requires inefficient bureaucratic footing around, in an authoritarian society it happens at the snap of a finger.
Posted by Ineffablesquirrel 9 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
To the comment that because someone "forfeited" a round they should be voted against, this is ridiculous. Some people (I would say most people) have lives in which they must participate and a debate on a website doesn't not rank as high as working, family, or community. I think this is a bogus reason to vote against someone. You should base your vote on the debate alone...what has been said on the debate not what wasn't said.
Posted by Ineffablesquirrel 9 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
I don't think either debater gave enough information for either side of the argument.
Posted by alexthemoderate 9 years ago
alexthemoderate
To the original post:

You claim that our system is bound to be corrupt. And that our leaders don't lead well.

Ok. That's fine to make that claim, even though I disagree with you.

But then you go on to talk about Ancient Rome and the Soviet Union, and I have a question: Have you ever taken a history class?

Ancient Rome was powerful because they ruled by the sword, not because of some mass acceptance of their ideals. They were a split state, constantly at war, and controlled about 1/4 of the world's population (then) by using a strict military law. I guess that makes them a great military power, but their government was run by an authoritarian government. Basically, you'd be foolish to think that an open forum of ideas for the common man would be allowed in a society like the Roman Empire, so you're kind of self-defeating on that point.

And then about the Soviet Union, I ACTUALLY laughed out loud when I read that. The Soviet Union did kill a lot of people, like you said, but the other 'good things that they did' that you claim they accomplished, well, that's where I take issue.

What did they accomplish? Do you actually know or have you never actually studied the Soviet Union? They collectivized farms, created heavy industrial infrastructure and truly had a 'planned' economy, as Communism would dictate. But did they have freedom of the press? Did they have freedom of assembly for redress against the government? NO, they did not. Their personal freedoms were suppressed in that period. Would you be willing to give up your freedom to criticize the government? I should hope not...

Along with all of that, the Soviet Union was MUCH more corrupt. You ever heard of gulags?

And by the way, the Soviet Union lasted from its establishment in 1922 and began to fall in 1985 and officially ended late 1991, making it last how long? 69 years. The U.S. has been around more than three times longer. Wow.
38 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by U.n 1 year ago
U.n
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Ineffablesquirrel 8 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by KoreaRocks 9 years ago
KoreaRocks
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by paulsckwon 9 years ago
paulsckwon
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by david0731 9 years ago
david0731
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by theaceb 9 years ago
theaceb
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by christ88 9 years ago
christ88
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by yoon172 9 years ago
yoon172
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by asian_invasion 9 years ago
asian_invasion
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by sluggerjal 9 years ago
sluggerjal
or8560yoon172Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03