Personal tools
 
Views

Debate: Asian democracies, disallow succession of close relatives to top posts

From Debatepedia

(Difference between revisions)
Jump to: navigation, search
Revision as of 17:19, 18 July 2008 (edit)
Alex.dukalskis (Talk | contribs)
(No)
← Previous diff
Revision as of 17:19, 18 July 2008 (edit)
Alex.dukalskis (Talk | contribs)
(No)
Next diff →
Line 98: Line 98:
====No==== ====No====
-Hardly. Those who grew up around political families may be better able to serve the people than those without such experience. Consider the Benazir Bhutto's courage in navigating Pakistani politics or the unique credibility and savvy that Ang Sang Suu Kyi's father bequeathed to her. Again, disallowing succession would only make sense if all such successions were a bad idea. The bottom line is that many are good for Asian countries, meaning a blanket ban without considering context would stunt freedoms and prosperity in many Asian countries.+Hardly. Those who grew up around political families may be better able to serve the people and may have more credibility than those without such experience. Consider the Benazir Bhutto's courage in navigating Pakistani politics or the unique credibility and savvy that Ang Sang Suu Kyi's father's legacy bequeathed to her. Again, disallowing succession would only make sense if all such successions were a bad idea. The bottom line is that many are good for Asian countries, meaning a blanket ban without considering context would stunt freedoms and prosperity in many Asian countries.

Revision as of 17:19, 18 July 2008

Should Asian democracies disallow succession of close relatives to top posts?

Contents

Background and Context of Debate:

Does possible cronism & nepotism supersede right of individual to run for post?

Yes

  • As most of them would already have established themselves in political scene through the influential family member succession can be due to cronism as opposed to capability-based appointment. For example, in Malaysian politics, many link the quick elevation to power of Khairy Jamaluddin, at only 32 now is the Deputy Chief of UMNO Youth and a Member of Parliament, is linked with his father-in-law being the Prime Minister Abdullah Badawi
  • The politically established family member could use the successor are a means to still exert influence and power over the government, thus any changes in the political scene is only superficial and not substantiated in new policies and ideas.





No

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here





Does it turn democracy into a form of monarchy?

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here





No

Even if it did, it should not matter. What should matter when judging the effectiveness of a government is its ability to improve the living standards of its people. Even with a highly restricted democracy, Lee Kuan Yew and his circle have turned Singapore into a rich and prosperous country. The Kims in North Korea, on the other hand, have run their country into the ground. Succession is not the issue; the capacity of the person(s) succeeding is the issue.





Does it undermine the credibility of the candidate & jeopardize his ability to serve the people?

Yes

Click on the pencil icon and research and write arguments here





No

Hardly. Those who grew up around political families may be better able to serve the people and may have more credibility than those without such experience. Consider the Benazir Bhutto's courage in navigating Pakistani politics or the unique credibility and savvy that Ang Sang Suu Kyi's father's legacy bequeathed to her. Again, disallowing succession would only make sense if all such successions were a bad idea. The bottom line is that many are good for Asian countries, meaning a blanket ban without considering context would stunt freedoms and prosperity in many Asian countries.




References:

Related pages on Debatepedia:

External links and resources:

Problem with the site? 

Tweet a bug on bugtwits
.