(1) Democracy is essentially about masses and majority. It does not take collective intelligence of mass into consideration. Therefore if masses are illiterate the democracy tend to produce awful result. Ex - Pakistan.
The strongest argument against democracy is a five minute discussion with the average voter. - Winston Churchill.
(2) Politicians the other hand focus only on securing no. and as a result resort to what is popular vs what is right. Ex. Minority appeasement tactics played in India.
(3) Democracy being out delays (read inefficiency) in governance since politicians have to take approval from masses. Ex. Growth of India vs China.
(4) In general masses vote and then their responsibility is considered over. They are not held accountable. If a corrupt person is elected we do not see masses held accountable for this. It is somehow again attributed to the “system”.
(5) This is again related to point#3. A change of leader could result in change of policies and this bring discontinuity, confusion and risks.
(6) Media is used to carry out propaganda which can really influence thinking of people. I am not sure if this is a argument against democracy but still wanted to bring this out,
(7) Democracy can easily led to a situation what is termed as “tyranny of the majority”. In this situation, minority does not enjoy equal rights. Ex. several Islamic states
Answers & Comments
(1) Democracy is essentially about masses and majority. It does not take collective intelligence of mass into consideration. Therefore if masses are illiterate the democracy tend to produce awful result. Ex - Pakistan.
The strongest argument against democracy is a five minute discussion with the average voter. - Winston Churchill.
(2) Politicians the other hand focus only on securing no. and as a result resort to what is popular vs what is right. Ex. Minority appeasement tactics played in India.
(3) Democracy being out delays (read inefficiency) in governance since politicians have to take approval from masses. Ex. Growth of India vs China.
(4) In general masses vote and then their responsibility is considered over. They are not held accountable. If a corrupt person is elected we do not see masses held accountable for this. It is somehow again attributed to the “system”.
(5) This is again related to point#3. A change of leader could result in change of policies and this bring discontinuity, confusion and risks.
(6) Media is used to carry out propaganda which can really influence thinking of people. I am not sure if this is a argument against democracy but still wanted to bring this out,
(7) Democracy can easily led to a situation what is termed as “tyranny of the majority”. In this situation, minority does not enjoy equal rights. Ex. several Islamic states
hope it helps please mark as brainliest