Accountable, responsive and legitimate government

The most basic outcome of democracy is that it produces a government that is

accountable to the citizens, and responsive to the needs and expectations of the
citizens.

Democratic government can apparently be less efficient than a non-democratic

government. This happens because a non-democratic government does not
need to arrive at consensus among a diverse set of people. Democracy
functions on the basis of deliberation and negotiation and hence decisions are
often delayed. But this does not mean that a democratic government is less
efficient.

A non-democratic government may be able to take decisions in non time. But one
needs to assess if those decisions are acceptable to the masses or are they really
solving people’s problems.

A democratic government is more transparent than a non-democratic government. A

citizen has the right to know the processes which were followed while taking a
decision in a democratic government. Thus, a democratic government is more
accountable and responsive to its citizens.

A democratic government is legitimate government because it is elected by the

people. This is the reason that democratic governments are thriving in most of the
countries.

Economic growth and development:

Data for the fifty years between 1950 and 2000 suggests that dictatorships have
slightly higher economic growth. In most of the democracies, the economic growth is
somewhat slower. But there are many democratic countries which are among the
economic superpowers of the world. This shows that economic growth does not
depend on the form of government only. Other factors also decide the trend of
economic growth; like population size, global situation, cooperation from other
countries, economic priorities of the country, etc.

When we look at several other positive outcomes; alongwith a reasonable economic

growth; then democracy is always better than dictatorship.

Reduction of inequality and poverty:

 Economic inequality has been increasing all over the world. In India, a larger portion
of the population is poor and the number of rich people is less. Moreover, there is a
large difference in the income of rich and the poor. In most of the countries,
democracy has failed in reducing economic inequalities.

Accommodation of social diversity:

Every society is full of diversities and conflicts are bound to happen among various
sections. It is impossible to fully rule out the possibility of conflicts. Bu democracy
normally develops a procedure by which there can be a healthy competition among
different sections of the society. People can learn to respect the differences and learn
to resolve conflicts in an amicable manner. In most of the democratic countries,
social diversity is accommodated peacefully. There can be some examples where
social diversity is still a big problem; like in case of Sri Lanka.

Dignity and freedom of the citizens:

Democracy has succeeded in ensuring the dignity and freedom of its citizens. Let us
take example of India. There are many social groups which had faced a long history
of oppression. Due to democratic process, a sizeable portion of these people have
been able to move up the social ladder and are in a position to assert themselves.

Equality of Women

Because of democracy, women could be able to wage a struggle for staking their
claim to equality. In most of the democratic countries, women have succeeded in
getting equal status in the society. This is not the case in most of the autocracies.

Caste Inequalities

Caste based inequalities had been quite predominant in India. But thanks to the
democratic process, such cases have reduced to a bare minimum. People from all
castes can be seen in every sphere of life.