Civics
So you are saying that sharing of power makes us more powerful. Sounds odd! Let me think.
Answer
Sharing power in a democracy can indeed strengthen the country in several ways:
- Conflict Reduction — When power is shared among different groups, it reduces the likelihood of social conflict. Cooperation and compromise become essential, leading to stability and unity.
- Democratic Spirit — Power-sharing embodies the essence of democracy by ensuring that various voices are heard. It prevents the concentration of power in a single entity, promoting fairness and inclusivity.
- Stability — By balancing power distribution, power-sharing maintains political stability. It prevents domination by any one group, fostering a harmonious environment.
Related Questions
What's wrong if the majority community rules? If Sinhalas don't rule in Sri Lanka, where else will they rule?
What kind of a solution is this? I am glad our Constitution does not say which minister will come from which community.
Read the given story carefully and answer the question that follows:
“In the city of Beirut, there lived a man called Khalil. His parents came from different communities. His father was an Orthodox Christian and mother a Sunni Muslim. This was not so uncommon in this modern, cosmopolitan city. People from various communities that lived in Lebanon came to live in its capital, Beirut. They lived together, intermingled, yet fought a bitter civil war among themselves. One of Khalil’s uncles was killed in that war.
At the end of this civil war, Lebanon’s leaders came together and agreed to some basic rules for power sharing among different communities. As per these rules, the country’s President must belong to the Maronite sect of Catholic Christians. The Prime Minister must be from the Sunni Muslim community. The post of Deputy Prime Minister is fixed for Orthodox Christian sect and that of the Speaker for Shi’a Muslims. Under this pact, the Christians agreed not to seek French protection and the Muslims agreed not to seek unification with the neighbouring state of Syria. When the Christians and Muslims came to this agreement, they were nearly equal in population. Both sides have continued to respect this agreement though now the Muslims are in clear majority.
Khalil does not like this system one bit. He is a popular man with political ambition. But under the present system, the top position is out of his reach. He does not practise either his father’s or his mother’s religion and does not wish to be known by either. He cannot understand why Lebanon can’t be like any other ‘normal’ democracy. “Just hold an election, allow everyone to contest and whoever wins maximum votes becomes the president, no matter which community he comes from. Why can’t we do that, like in other democracies of the world?” he asks. His elders, who have seen the bloodshed of the civil war, tell him that the present system is the best guarantee for peace…”
If you had the power to rewrite the rules in Lebanon, what would you do? Would you adopt the ‘regular’ rules followed everywhere, as Khalil suggests? Or stick to the old rules? Or do something else?
In 2005, some new laws were made in Russia giving more powers to its president. During the same time the US president visited Russia. What according to this cartoon, is the relationship between democracy and concentration of power? Can you think of some other examples to illustrate the point being made here?
