A democracy is defined as a form of government in which the citizens rule. However, within this category, there are two different types of democracy; a republican and a direct. The question is, which form is best? In my opinion, a republican democracy is the best. However, it has problems of its own.
Direct democracies and republican democracies have important similarities and differences.To provide a little background, the direct democracy originated in ancient Athens Greece. It is defined as a form of democracy in which every citizen votes directly on every issue. The republican democracy originated in Rome, Italy and is defined as a democracy is which citizens vote on representatives to vote on legislation for them. First, the two democracies …show more content…
First, a republican democracy is more open to all types of populations. A republic is not limited by the size of a population, while in a direct democracy, large populations do not work; it costs too much money and too much time. A republican democracy also makes better decisions for society. The jobs of the elected representatives are to study specific issues, and, in theory, this means better decisions are made for the country. In a direct democracy, citizens are not always educated on the issues, and decisions are not always made effectively. A republican democracy is also much more practical; voting occurs less. Direct democracies entail constant voting, which limits time; it is inefficient. Even though a republic is better than a direct democracy, it does not mean it is the correct way of government; there are problems within this that need to be fixed. For example, chosen representatives do not always vote on what is best for everybody, but for their party(democratic or republican) or sponsor influence. Republics do not always allow for citizens to share their opinions, or become as involved as they would in a direct democracy. Many republicans today are very extreme and have no in between. To elaborate, in America, there are normally extreme democratic parties and extreme republican parties. This can cause problems among citizens and also encourage corruption. Lastly, the
Direct democracies and republican democracies have important similarities and differences.To provide a little background, the direct democracy originated in ancient Athens Greece. It is defined as a form of democracy in which every citizen votes directly on every issue. The republican democracy originated in Rome, Italy and is defined as a democracy is which citizens vote on representatives to vote on legislation for them. First, the two democracies …show more content…
First, a republican democracy is more open to all types of populations. A republic is not limited by the size of a population, while in a direct democracy, large populations do not work; it costs too much money and too much time. A republican democracy also makes better decisions for society. The jobs of the elected representatives are to study specific issues, and, in theory, this means better decisions are made for the country. In a direct democracy, citizens are not always educated on the issues, and decisions are not always made effectively. A republican democracy is also much more practical; voting occurs less. Direct democracies entail constant voting, which limits time; it is inefficient. Even though a republic is better than a direct democracy, it does not mean it is the correct way of government; there are problems within this that need to be fixed. For example, chosen representatives do not always vote on what is best for everybody, but for their party(democratic or republican) or sponsor influence. Republics do not always allow for citizens to share their opinions, or become as involved as they would in a direct democracy. Many republicans today are very extreme and have no in between. To elaborate, in America, there are normally extreme democratic parties and extreme republican parties. This can cause problems among citizens and also encourage corruption. Lastly, the