Demonstrates how people's confidence in democracy has been tested in two incidents in Donald Trump's selection and the referendum on the exit of the UK from the European Union (EU). Many have questioned whether these results were due to fraudulent reports and untimely technology companies.
The breakthrough debate has left the UK government in both sides. If politicians were to vote for re-vote on the issue, then the original break vote was declared as completely illegal. And now because of saying 'do not vote again', it seems that people who doubt doubts about the results of the breaks it cannot be silenced for some days. As a result, the decision taken by the United Kingdom on this issue will weaken democracy.
The way in which the media personality, politicians, and the general public criticized the last election in the United States, has lowered the status of the country's head of state, and it naturally damaged democracy.
The delicate situation of liberal democracy in other parts of the world is becoming increasingly visible. The rate of voter participation is declining in elections and the belief in democratic freedom among the ruling political parties is declining.
The questioned democracy is pushing politics to polarize. The efforts to politicize the lies of the politicians are unacceptable in election results. Based on the fake or incomplete information, voters are compelled to choose their candidates. Due to not getting proper information, it is doubtful to vote in the fracture and repeat the 'enemy of the people' in the autocratic campaign against the claimants of the re-election.
After being elected the Prime Minister of the Democrat Hungry Orban, the media has taken steps to curb the freedom of the press and parliament's power. Elections held this year due to political violence and uncertainty in Italy. On the other hand, allegations of violating the EU's funding policy, including the violation of human rights and the rule of law against Poland's government.
Definitely, ideal democracy is such a system where as many as possible voters will vote and they will get accurate information about candidates. The candidates will present themselves and the opponent's interactive information in many ways. But we can see that their fight is stuck in the propaganda of social media.
To change this situation, the voters will have to work with the mission to improve the quality and the quality of the candidates.
When the immigrants get citizenship in many democratic countries, including the United States, the United Kingdom, the government-approved citizenship test is to be passed. In the same way, whether the knowledge of voters' candidates and selection-related fundamental knowledge is not enough, why it is not examined? If the voters were given the ability to vote on the test, then such a minimum could be determined by which they would be able to choose skilled and good candidates.
Through this, voters received the message that voting is not very cheap, this right has to be acquired. If this is done then the voters are not only, the candidates will also try to improve them. In order to ensure that the lowest knowledge of citizenship and candidate selection in which they are received, it is necessary to insert the relevant topics in primary or secondary level textbooks.
Only voters will be examined if they take the examinations. Politicians will also have to pass the examination to be candidates. This will increase the quality of the voters and the candidates and the legitimacy of democracy will be ensured.
Eligible politicians can be rewarded for the formation of the country. MP or senators should be recognized for doing good in special cases. It also gives voters easy access to the quality of the candidates during the election.
Singapore is a great example in this case. If there is a target of achieving the targets of growth, income etc., the bonus for the concerned ministers is given.
If these reforms will not be the result of the selection of breaks or trumps? If this happens, the results that will change will not be called. But the way of the results will be different, it can be said.
First of all, voters can see the high-quality debate. Secondly, the candidates will run their campaign more forcefully. Thirdly, voters will find far more reliable information about candidates.
If this is the acceptance of the election fruit will be much broader. Selected leaders will be able to do their work more independently. At the end of the day, democracy will be benefited.