Before we begin, I feel that there is a need for definitions of terms regarding the topic, in order to give a better view on it.
Democracy is defined as a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state. Members of the society would have equal access to power and universally recognized freedoms and liberties. Every citizen would have chances to express their views to the government, be it through pure or representative democracy. Equality - that is the very reason why democracy is commonly practiced in countries all over the world.
Stability itself on the other hand, is branched into economic and social stability, having shaped by political stability in democracy. Hence, there is clearly a need to define which stability democracy creates in a society. But before that, let’s see why democracy is the most suitable type of government.
Many believe democracy as the ideal type of government for every state, for it is clear that there is equality for everyone. Everybody’s views are taken into consideration by the government. With that, the connection between the citizens and the government are strong, unlike other forms of governance such as communism or autocracy, where there is a limit to what citizens can do. Compared to other forms of governance, in general, democracy is best at creating stability in terms of politics, economic and society. However, some may disagree for democracy has its cons. But let’s face reality. Nothing in this world is perfect, for everything has its cons. It’s the amount of disadvantages that matters. In other words, the best would be defined as having the least cons.
Politically, democracy is certainly able to create stability within a government in most occasions. Elected parties or individuals are chosen through majority of the citizen votes. This shows members of the government are elected fairly and justifiably. With that, there are no reasons to complain that elected parties/individuals are not suitable for governance. Though as it seems, it does not necessarily mean all elected ones are the worthy ones. In some occasions, elected ones do not keep their promises. After being elected and recognized as one with political power, one could actually abuse their powers and thus create instability.
In terms of economic stability, it all depends on the politics. Same goes with the social stability. The government determines the outcomes of social and economic stability.
And now I’ll be using Singapore largely as an example. Representative democracy is what we have in Singapore. So far, under Mr. Lee Kuan Yew, democracy has been very effective in shaping the nation into what it is as of now. And yes, Singapore is seen as one of the most stable and well managed countries in the world, economically, politically and socially. This is clear evidence that representative democracy has done its job in creating stability in the society. But then again, there had to be flaws in the ever-so democratic Singapore. In Singapore, PAP is seen to have the majority seats in the parliament, with landslide victories for every election. This could then also be seen as totalitarianism, where instead of having wide variety of parties in the government, PAP is dominating the government. Plus, to certain citizens, the dominance and ruling of MM Lee have stirred uproar in the society, with accusations of MM Lee being less democratic.
This example shows that democracy is determined by the people. It is not the political theory of democracy itself that creates stability in the society, but instead the people of a democratic society that creates the stability. Thus one can infer that democracy, as it seems, is just a one of the very tools to create peace and stability in the society. It is actually the very people in the society that matters.
Also not to mention, the very thing that makes democracy ineffective in certain occasions – tyranny of the majority. Though this occurs on rare cases, it clearly shows the downfall of democracy. Instead of trying to create stability, tyranny of the majority could actually result in further downfall of a particular state.
Hence in conclusion, though it is filled with cons, democracy is still able to create stability in a society. Though it may be seen as just a simple tool in order to create stability, with the right people and the right choices, democracy could eventually overcome the potential negative sides of political theory of democracy itself, and thus creating a stable society.
