Topic: Democracy only in papers. - page 2. (Read 227 times)

The statement above can be true yet can also be false. There is no sufficient evidence to support that claims, as there are many sides in political and societal issues regarding the news that is broadcast publicly. Hatred towards media happens when you do not want to believe the data they collected as you supported the latter part of that news. Thus making it "Fake and controlled".

Most of the media channels are owned by the politicians indirectly so they are not going to support anything that people wanted to know, either they will be a favor of one leader and opposing other leader's opinions and the media always suppress a normal human but they are afraid of powerful people. Anyway, media is also a company looking to make profits so these morals are just for the sake of statement not for the practical life.

Democracy can only develop where the media can operate independently just as journalists protect our democracy we must protect them. We must protect the freedom of the media as a fundamental human right for the benefit of citizens all over the world autocracy is better than democracy in developing democracy for corruption. In the same way democracy does not create obstacles in the way of development.

Calling yourself a democratic country probably helps a lot do receive international help from the UN and IMF. I would expect that western countries are not willing to pay a lot of money if the country is a dictatorship. So trying to make your country look as open as possible for the outside world is all about attracting new investors. Corruption also plays a big role in these countries.

The problem is not with the democracy but the leaders and the officials are running the government so they decide which one is over, in Africa the leaders are rich enough to live a good life for centuries but those people are living with nothing. Democracy is important though or else your country also will be like North Korea under the rule of Kim where people are dying due to starving but the leader don't care about it.

The problem with democracy in certain African counties is that people still have no choice in there. They vote for the most democratic president, but the elections are set up and the nation ends up with dictators, and it's been going on and on for years. @Gyfts is right, corruption isn't something that can be easily broken, it can take decades and many revolutions

Why it's so much more difficult in Africa?
Honestly, it's a rather difficult question, but I can't think of a better explanation than simply geographical isolation from the West. It is well-known from the world's history that even thousands of years ago when people used to live in tribes the location was crucial. Often those closely situated could find a common language easier and form bigger groups together (which later became civilizations), as opposed to with those that were located far away and were always considered hostile.

See, when the democracy started to spread in the West, Africa was kind of left out, while other countries formed unions, arranged meetings, and discussed regulations, future directions. Maybe that is one of the reasons this system wasn't fully and accurately implemented in African countries.

In addition, things are complicated with the fact that many countries in this continent don't want to become democratic, many still run autocratic regimes, and this surrounding also has an impact and slows the movement in the democratic direction for other countries.

Well, ask yourself -- why is it the social structure in Africa is so wildly incompatible with the west that democracy would be incongruent to African countries?  I can't think anything, we're all people after all. Democracy works regardless of the social structure, which is why Asian countries practice democracy despite having different cultural systems than the US or even European countries. Japan, South Korea, just to name a couple. Democracy is only what you make of it. It's great on paper, but it's also fragile and malleable. Africa's had a long history of corruption and it doesn't change overnight. And there is some responsibility of the people to make sure democracy works. After all, the preamble to the US construction states "we the people."

During the late 80's and 90's many countries all over the world started adopting the Democratic system of government to suit in with the trend of times world over. Africa countries included as a continent was not left behind in this adoption of the Democratic practice after much of subsequent military rules.

But as times goes on the supposed democracy as adopted by these African countries are explicitly not practice as it is in papers. In other words, it's not practice as borrowed from the West.

We at most times  discover powerful individuals with weak institutions, overriding of the judicial system by this very powerful individuals. Widespread police brutality with obvious blind eyes to it's effect on the citizens. Impunity of political office holders during and after their tenures.

Lack of the provision of social amenities and social welfare packages to her citizens, young and old.
All these leading to the decadence of moral behaviors, social values and more.

In all of this, it beat my imagination that I can't help but to ask, has the modern democracy really done a lot good to African countries than harm, owing to the fact that Africans had their very pattern of system system of governing and leadership administrative system before the coming of democracy which was sold out with so much painting of how best it is compared to any other systems of government or rulership that had ever exist, especially with those of the precolonial era.

Cause today there's much of underdevelopment of development in many African society's, Nigeria for example has become an epic centre for borrowing  and therefore indepted herself beyond expectations.
Infrastructural and human capital development is at it ebb.

Injustice and weak judicial system has pervaded the court system today unlike the precolonial or before the adoption of Democratic practice. The list is unending.
So my concern is why is the kind of democracy as practiced in African society's different from the kinds founds in the West, when it was actually from the Western world that this very pattern of governance was borrowed from? Or is it that democracy as a system of governance is incongruent to the African sociocultural ambient and such incongruency eludes the us as to why the difference in practice and in paper?