The prompt was "democracy: is it for everyone?"

[archangelcricket]

the prompt was "Democracy: is it for everyone?"
i need to know what to fix!!!! help!!!!!!!!!
Life is odd. We are taught about forgettable people who ruled nameless countries. Then we are tested on these unusable facts, because, as many people have said, “those who do not learn of history are doomed to repeat it.” But, at last, I can use my useless knowledge on this, my democracy speech.
HL Mencken said that, “Democracy is the theory that the common people know what they want, and deserve to get it good and hard.” True democracy means that each person votes separately for their collective leader or leaders. It does not mean that they vote for representatives to vote for them. This is called a republic. Right now, we do not have a true democracy, but a republic. Our government has not always been the same, although we have been taught that the American government is very near perfect. At first, it was only men who owned land and were very wealthy who voted. In this sense, it was a kind of aristocracy of plutocracy in which the country was ruled by a group that was considered superior to others. It could have also been considered a totalitarian government where any uprisings were suppressed until slaves and women had revolted enough to gain the right to vote.
There have been many different types of government that have been successful, although just as many have failed. These include oligarchies and monarchies to name just a few. These did not work because many people are greedy and power-seeking and eventually overthrew these dictatorships. There are also many forms that work. These, overall, include forms that require more than one person as ruler, such as collectivism, democracy, republicanism, militarism, and imperialism.
Democracy is not for everyone. In war, militarism would be the best way to rule a country, where military preparedness is of the highest importance. For equal rights for everybody, an egalitarian rule would work best. Egalitarianism is the belief in equal political, economic, social, and civil rights for all people. The government that would work the best for it to rule the longest is fascism. Fascism was created by Benito Mussolini and his political goal was to form the perfect ruling. Fascists believe in a dictator with stringent controls on a person from the time they are born until the time they die. They also wished to suppress the opposition with terror and censorship, while still maintaining a very strong sense of nationalism. The citizens may not like it too much, but the ruler will stay in power the longest. In times of peace, a democracy, in which common people are not sidetracked by war plans, would work the best. Overall, I personally believe that socialism would work the longest and the best. This would be when the means of producing and distributing goods are owned collectively, and political power is exercised by the whole community.
Democracy is not for everyone. It all depends on the current situation and the demographics of the country or society.
Let’s say that universal democracy is possible. Would we really want it? Many small poorer countries would not be able to sustain themselves for very long. They do not have the resources to maintain the peace and order required to successfully live in a democratic society. They would crumble, leaving their leadership open to any selfish individual or group that would lead the country to even more hopeless conditions.
Some say that having all countries become democratic would cause a worldwide “peace.” Joshua Muravchik writes that, “There is dispute about whether democracies are more peaceful, per se, or only more peaceful toward other democracies.” But there are visible problems with this. The smaller, poorer countries would need help from some other nation. The largest nation would offer their assistance and continue fighting over who would become their savior. It would become an auction and the highest bidder would be the hero. Or their bidding would become a more violent fight against each other and the winner would then be an enemy and a hero. There are so many things that could happen as a result of trying to help another nation that it really isn’t worth the trouble to start in the first place.
The harsh reality is that there will never be a universal democracy, no matter how hard we try. All the unpredictable lives we lead are much better now than they could ever become. Governments rise and fall at different times, just as the tidal waves hit the sand. Chaos makes life interesting.

[ophelia]

Why do you need help? Is this for class? If so, the grammatical side of things looks good, and you have done your homework with lightly brushing the definitions of different types of governments(although I could disagree with a few of your points, I think you have done a good job).

My suggestion would be: alter your concluding paragraph. It sounds like you are trying to wrap things up quickly- it sounds rushed. Plus, your conclusion about chaos and the unpredictable lives of humans has nothing to do with your original thesis and you are sliding away from the topic. If you are supposed to interject your personal opinion in the paper, you could work with your original closing, but add a few more sentences about why you think things should be chaotic, or etc. Earlier in the paper, you seem to favor socialism, but your statement about chaos contradicts that point. Perhaps you should expound upon your thoughts about socialism, why you think it would work particularly in this country, or maybe list some examples of other socialist governments that you think had the right idea and why.

Just my 0.02- from a long life of writing English papers. But overall, good job!

[The_Lady_Aphrodite]

Hi and welcome to the board...
If this was not for a paper then.... you got my vote!! LOL