Tragic Stories of Human Suffering

It is not uncommon to hear and read about or even witness the in many corners of the globe, in both near and far distant places. It is not also uncommon that they are, more often than not, Man-made tragedies: political repressions, violent social strife, armed conflicts, rebellion, etc. If gauged by their immeasurable and profoundly enduring consequences on human lives, the urgent need to fathom their root cause is beyond any shadow of doubt. And only then could humanity genuinely answer the yearning calls of the helpless and powerless victims.

Across space and time, political repressions, violent social strife, armed conflicts, etc. are either generated or intensified by mainly three factors: a lack of strong and independent institutions, a high and persistent degree of concentration of political power, and a lack of transparency and accountability. Yet it is not enough to just identify the causes of these enduring tragedies. After all, the pressing task is to identify plausible measures and workable solutions to deal with these issues; that is, the real challenge is to unearth the ways in which the aforementioned factors could be mitigated if not entirely eliminated.

Get quality help now

Marrie pro writer

Verified writer

Proficient in: Accountability

5 (204)

“ She followed all my directions. It was really easy to contact her and respond very fast as well. ”

+84 relevant experts are online

Hire writer

This piece aims exactly to undertake that task.

In the following lines, I argue that “democracy”, understood as a political system or a form of government that invariably promotes strong and independent institutions, guarantees the separation of powers, and unconditionally ensures transparency and accountability of state apparatus, is the ultimate solution. It is absolutely true that I am adopting a functional definition of the concept of democracy, but it is equally true that these are the central goals of a functioning democracy.

I’ll next analyze how democracy best achieves each of these goals and how it is thus better equipped to alleviate the above-mentioned tragedies. To be sure, however, democracy is not an infallible system—it can in fact often be messy, frustrating, and most of all unstable; nevertheless, its particularity is that democracy works better than its alternatives: “Democracy”, Winston Churchill asserted quite pointedly in 1947, “is the worst form of government except all the other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

First, democracy is more likely to better promote strong and independent institutions. For instance, unlike authoritarianism and dictatorship, both of which succeed only by weakening or even dismantling institutions, democracy is based on the core tenet of building and strengthening them. Indeed, both authoritarianism and dictatorship are built around strong leaders, who quite simply invariably strive to project personal strength and guts by amassing political powers at the expense of institutional checks and balances. Quite sadly, however, the fall of these regimes is more likely to bring the country into chaos, state failure, and even armed conflicts as different factions compete for state power—with the rules of the game usually being the law of the jungle; this is particularly true for countries that have witnessed long years of authoritarian/dictatorial rule.

Iraq, Yemen, and Libya (amongst others) offer illustrative cases in that regard. Likewise, undemocratic regimes are more prone to chronic instability since they often lack legitimacy. Though they might manage to stay in power despite popular discontents, they usually succeed in doing so through recourse of coercion, persecution, and constantly manufactured fear of repercussions for (any sort of manifested) disobedience. Moreover, to succeed in consolidating power, authoritarian and dictatorial regimes invariably endeavor to centralize and concentrate political powers with the aim of having control over the entire state apparatus. The danger, yet again, is that such regimes are more liable to social and political grievances as they are inherently exclusive and blatantly discriminatory.

They must, therefore, have recourse to brutal force and political wickedness to remain in power; no wonder coups and counter-coups are likely to become ubiquitous as the military becomes politicized, and politics militarized. By sharp contrast, however, democracy works best through the separation of powers (into executive, judicial, and legislative), thus not only promoting institutional independence but also, and perhaps more significantly, allowing for checks and balances throughout the state apparatus. Moreover, democracy is better equipped to allow broader and more inclusive political participation and social engagements through party competitions and popular elections, demonstrations, and even party membership.

Finally, by allowing strong and independent institutions to flourish and by permitting the separation of powers and checks and balances, democracy ensures transparency and accountability of state apparatus. For instance, a corrupt or incompetent government will surely be voted out of the office either through (peaceful) protests or referenda and rounds of elections. By the same token, the independence of institutions would also ensure that corrupt leaders are fairly and transparently held accountable for their misdeeds. Undoubtedly, the principle that democracy guarantees transparency and accountability renders it ever more stable and more enduring both as a political system and as a form of government.

In a nutshell, in promoting strong and resilient institutions that have the capacity to resist and absorb shocks (both internal and external), democracy helps foster the stability and security of the state. Likewise, in preventing the concentration of the political powers in the hands of despots, democracy ensures that even the most vulnerable social layers—children, women, elderly people, and disabled—would not be encroached at will by the mighty. In addition to protecting the most vulnerable from political oppression and persecution, however, democracy allows for more inclusive mass political participation; thus ensuring that people can express their grievances without having recourse to violent strife, rebellion, or even revolution.

It also ensures that no one is above the law to be immune to transparency checks and ushering in the required accountability. According to Andrew Heywood, democracy can play even greater role in alleviating Man-made human tragedies through sustainable peace and security since it fosters the legitimacy of a political regime through consent (of being ruled); it also allows rival interest groups to live together with relative peace through compromise, conciliation, and negotiation; and finally, democracy “operates as a feedback system that tends towards long-term political stability” and human prosperity.

Since the importance of any political system is measured by its ability to protect and improve the wellbeing of its population; since the more capable a system of government is in playing a positive role in social and economic developments the more legitimacy it gains; and, above all, since the value of any form of government must be gauged by its ability to promote independent and resilient institutions, ensure an effective and equitable distribution of powers, and guarantee the accountability and transparency of the state apparatus, there are, undoubtedly, solid enough reasons to argue for the importance of living in a democracy. Yet, if history teaches us anything at all about how democracy succeeds or fails, it is that it succeeds better when and if nurtured “locally”; therefore, attempts to impose it from the top (externally) is highly likely to be a disastrous endeavor.