DESECRATED DEMOCRACY IS BETTER THAN DICTATORSHIP.

Mr President, Honorable Chief Guest, Respected Teachers, Ladies and Gentlemen, and my dear fellows, Assalam O Alaikum! The topic of my speech today is desecrated democracy is better than dictatorship. I would like to start by quoting Abraham Lincoln, he said, Democracy is the government of the people, by the people, for the people. That itself concludes all but ladies and gentlemen we all need to give arguments to prove something true. There are basically two types of government, Democracy and Dictatorship. Democracy means the people decide, and have access to all the correct information to decide. It is a Form of government in which supreme power is vested in the people and exercised by them directly or indirectly through a system of representation usually involving periodic free elections. Democracy is a majority ruled government, while a dictatorship is government ruled by the few over the many. There are different kinds, such as Communism where people do not have property; Monarchy where ruled by birth right; Oligarchy where ruled by the few military; and Fascism which is the system of government in Italy. So these two types of government are totally opposite of each other. And thats why Abraham Lincoln said, No man is good enough to govern another man without that other's consent. Dictatorships often appear invulnerable. But it is firmly believed that desecrated democracy is better than dictatorship. Why so? It is because Intelligence agencies, police, military forces, prisons, concentration camps, and execution squads are controlled by a powerful few. A country's finances, natural resources, and production capacities are often arbitrarily plundered by dictators and used to support the dictators' will. In comparison, democratic opposition forces often appear extremely weak, ineffective, and powerless. That perception of invulnerability against powerlessness makes effective opposition unlikely. Ladies and Gentlemen! That is not the whole story, however. Dictators can be conquered, but most quickly and with least cost if their weaknesses can be identified and the attack concentrated on them. If I start sharing the weaknesses of dictatorships, it may take a very long time, so I would still like to share few: Number 1. The cooperation of people, groups, and institutions may be restricted or withdrawn.

2. Past policies cease resulting in conflicting policies. 3. The system may become routine in its operation, less able to adjust quickly to new situations. 4. Personnel and resources will not be easily available. 5. Fearful Subordinates may not report accurate or complete information to the dictators to make decisions. 6. Internal institutional conflicts and personal rivalries and hostilities may harm, and even disrupt, the operation of the dictatorship. 7. Public become restless in response to conditions, and restrictions and make them hostile to the regime. 8. Regional, class, cultural, or national differences may lead to conflicts. 9. The power hierarchy of the dictatorship is always unstable to some degree, and individuals feel insecure. 10. Sections of the police or military forces may act to achieve their own objectives. 11. With so many decisions made by so few people in the dictatorship, mistakes of judgment, policy, and action are likely to occur. And list goes on and on.. But ladies and gentlemen, even if some believe in their strength, all dictatorships have weaknesses, internal inefficiencies, personal rivalries, institutional inefficiencies, and conflicts between organizations and departments. These weaknesses, over time, tend to make the regime less effective and more vulnerable to changing conditions and deliberate resistance. And last but now least, it always ends with hostility. Now coming to democracy, we all very well understand that in order to deserve the label of democracy, a country needs to fulfill some basic requirements - and they need not only be written down in it's constitution but must be kept up in everyday life by politicians and authorities. Guarantee of basic Human Rights to every individual person and the state and its authorities as well as any social groups. It require the Separation of powers between the institutions of the state, that is, Executive, Legislative and Judiciary. It must ensure the freedom of opinion, speech, press and mass media, Religious liberty, right to vote, good governance with least corruption. Ladies and Gentlemen! If these requirements are fulfilled, it brings true democracy to a country. And the advantages of true democracy are numerous which definitely leads to development and prosperity of the society. Now if I like to share with your some advantages of democracy, Number 1. It offers Peaceful Modifications in the Government without hostility. In a democracy, authority can be reassigned from one party to another by the mode of elections by the vote power of the general public of a country.

2. Furthermore, any government is confined to an election tenure after which it has to contend against other parties to recover power. This method averts monopoly of the reigning party. 3. It leads to the Feeling of Gratitude and responsibility towards the citizens. The ruling party owes their accomplishment in the elections to the people to select their government for next tenure. 4. An additional vital advantage of democracy is that the citizens achieve a sense of contribution in the procedure of selecting their government. They get the chance to speak out their views by method of electoral voting. This gives the feeling of social responsibility to the citizens. I would like to quote Aristotle who said, In a democracy the poor will have more power than the rich, because there are more of them, and the will of the majority is supreme. Similarly Edward M. Forster said, Two cheers for Democracy: one because it admits variety and two because it permits criticism. Those who are against the democracy often quote Walter Lippmannss, who said, What we call a democratic society might be defined for certain purposes as one in which the majority is always prepared to put down a revolutionary minority. This may be true when the political system created by successive constitutions has been a democratic one in form but has seldom been made to work in a democratic fashion. But Ladies and Gentlemen! Just imagine the next time you step into the voting booth your ballot only lists one candidate to choose from. Or perhaps your ballot lists four candidates, but they are all from one single party. HORRIBLE! So to answer all the objections about democracy, and to endorse the opinion that even the desecrated democracy is better than dictatorship, I would like to quote Alfred E. Smith, who said, ALL THE ILLS OF DEMOCRACY CAN BE CURED BY MORE, AND MORE, AND MORE DEMOCRACY. Thank you! Zeeyah Khan