Civics
Arguments for and against democracy
Practice questions
If voters question both short-term benefit and long-term harm of a policy, what is shown?If the opposition debates policy in parliament even after electoral defeat, which merit is shown?When will accountability be considered weak in democracy?If citizen dignity in democracy remains limited only to voting and there is no participation, which conclusion is correct?Which criticism of democracy becomes stronger when elections are fought only on emotional slogans?If a minority group can peacefully present its demand in democracy, which argument strengthens?If elections are regular in democracy but citizens fear criticism, which pro-democracy argument is harmed?If someone says majority opinion in democracy can also be wrong, what is the correct democratic response?If someone rejects democracy completely due to fear of corruption, what is the balanced response?In democracy, legitimacy of a decision comes not only from outcome but also from what?If winning becomes the only goal in electoral politics and public interest is ignored, which conclusion is correct?If citizens get time to understand policy but the decision comes late, which expert-level conclusion is correct?Which is the broadest expert argument in favour of democracy?Which is the broadest expert summary of criticisms of democracy?What should be the final expert conclusion on arguments for and against democracy?If citizens vote in regular elections but cannot discuss policies, which democratic strength will be considered weak?If people can remove the government in a democracy but institutions are weak, which balanced conclusion is correct?If election campaigns focus only on personalities instead of issues, which criticism becomes stronger?If different views get space in democracy but decisions are delayed, how should this be understood at expert level?If criticism is treated as anti-national in democracy, which pro-democracy argument becomes weak?