The democratic system is the best type of government ever formulated; however, this does not imply that each democratic system is good. Numerous nations with a free government are kept down by the nonattendance of a law based convention and issues as poverty, transgressions, corruption, natural calamities, and common strife. Democracy allows individuals talk what they have in their minds and shape their kids' prospects. When many people from various locations in the world are ready to face risks, it proves that they endure an appeal.
Democracy in the third world countries has experienced the same issues as those in the rich world. Democracy is a good thing for every country but it seems to be losing what it was initially supposed to do. Third world countries have focused on short term spending as opposed to long haul investment, which is opposed to what democracy supports. For example, Brazil permits its laborers to resign at the age of fifty-three, however, has done little to make a current air transport system. India pays a lot to customer gatherings, yet puts too little in investment (Hirst, 2000). Political frameworks have been caught by vested parties and undermined by those who are against democracy.
Before the occurrence of financial crisis, there was a huge conviction that democracy was not just ethically better than authoritarian types of government, but on the other hand were better situated to manage monetary and money related turmoil. The latest monetary crisis, however, has raised doubt about this suspicion, particularly as some dictator states, for example, China have clearly weathered the storm as compared to its counter parts; Europe and the US. Most business analysts and political researchers still concur that liberal democracy is in reality a superior arrangement of government than all others in delivering a long time open enterprise. It is contended here that liberal democracy offers more significant strength and solidness, particularly in times of crisis. Some would dissent, proposing that democracy may be the problem itself, with a continuous electoral cycle and giving an excess of reverence to exceptional intrigues that wield lopsided impact. This was debated on later that in every political system, there must be special interests.
Shortcomings of Liberal Democracy
Many political systems in the world suffer from corruption but democratic countries suffer less than the others. Freedom of the data and free media are among the best counters to war on corruption. Studies have shown that there is a correlation between freedom of information and media with economic development. Although there are special cases like oil rich Qatar or Kuwait. As indicated by the World Bank, of 80 most exceedingly extreme money related crisis amid the most recent 40 years, just five were in democracy (Przeworski, 2000). Democratic countries face less refugee crisis and less famine cases. Democracies likewise have a tendency to oversee assets and open merchandise much better than their dictatorial system. Russia, for instance, squanders as much gas every year as France devours as there is no motivator to apply strict doctrines on energy effectiveness
The most widely recognized negative reaction of liberal democracy is their transient center as a result of the regular decisions that in reality describe democracy. The Authoritarian administrations additionally confront the same issue. For example, the decision of literate Russians, to expand their transient properties since there is an excess of instabilities about what's to come. When any Russian accumulates riches, he looks forward to taking these amounts to abroad and sends his kids to another country for educating. The immense outpourings of Chinese cash-flow toward the West in the previous year would demonstrate that a large portion of the nouveau riche is additionally looking to fence their wagers against the conceivable negative advancements in China.
Another criticism is that liberal democracy is under obligation to particular vested parties, for example, ranchers who may utilize their campaigning energy to pick up sponsorships advantageous to them yet harmful to society. On the other hand, specific vested parties may be just as or more persuasive in non-democracy. The impacts of the SOEs in China, Gazprom in Russia or the military-mechanical complex in the US are clear illustration.
The current economic crisis is not the first and won't be the last such crisis. Without a doubt, since the time when money related capitalism developed there have been emergencies brought on by exorbitant credit extension, budgetary hypothesis and resource value bubbles. In any case, this crisis is outstanding in the quantity of economies that have been influenced by both sides of the Atlantic. This was to a great extent because of an administrative breakdown brought on by a political insecurity and in addition deregulation created by the mysterious doings of the dissenting political hobbies and lobbyists crossing the open political procedure. There was likewise an emotional extension of influence before the crisis. It was likewise the first significant crisis that has commonly been a family unit obligation crisis (Lijphart, 1969). It is additionally remarkable due to the way of the contemporary financial frameworks which means that the high level of universal integration and the complexities of the securities business sector added additional unpredictability to the mixture.
Another significant strategy test is reproducing the world's financial and monetary request during an era when the move in worldwide financial influence is changing the geopolitical and also the geo-financial scene. The ascent of the BRICS opposite the EU and the U.S reflects the ascent of the US versus Europe in the 1920s and 1930s, and may offer some noteworthy parallels.
Different options for capitalism have not gained much popularity but rather there is level headed discussion about unbridled the private enterprise that leaves non-monetarily quantifiable expenses un-figured into the equation. Numerous nations are attempting to reinforce their administrative systems, some are permitting a more significant part for the state, yet they are not tossing capitalism inside and out. Fortifying these administrative systems, however, is exceedingly mind boggling; with respect to each arrangement there is a shrewd path around it. The conduct of large corporations, for example, the Amazon, Google and Starbucks maintaining a strategic distance from duty in the UK is one illustration of cunning expense legal counselors beating the framework. There is expanding confirmation of native outrage against government officials and brokers who seem to lead their issues on the premise of unadulterated covetousness and childishness with no obvious thought for society in general.
As the crisis proceeds with, its the full impact on liberal democracy stays to be seen. Financial disparity and government debasement have a tendency to end up more apparent in the general society eye amid retreats, and both tend to fan the blazes of populist and hostile to just components. The expanded well-known disappointment with democracy in Eastern Europe is a sample of the long haul inconvenience the retreat may worsen. In Ukraine, Hungary, and Bulgaria, not exactly a quarter of the populace is fulfilled by the way democracy is working in their nation, with more than 70 for each penny in every nation naming debasement as a huge issue. Surveys uncover a comparative level of disappointment with defilement in Russia and China.
The crisis is likewise trying the dedication to European coordination. Chosen heads of government have been leaving to be supplanted by technocratic executives. There was a period when the elected executive of Greece announced that he would hold a submission on an important bundle of starkness measures; he was cautioned by France and Germany the next day to pull back his choice. The financial crisis uncovered various defects in the framework, including administrative holes; deficient supervision; poor corporate administration and short-termism in budgetary establishments; obscure markets; and excessively complex items, particularly subordinates. The fundamental guilty parties are plainly national governments who acquired a lot of their requirements. From the latest study from IMF, complete debts in the major OECD nations was 32% higher, as an offer of GDP, in 2010 than governments had gauge in 2007.
The finger can be pointed rightly at those lawmakers and authorities in the Western world for permitting the credit blast to happen. Top of the guilty party rundown is Alan Greenspan whose propensity for bringing down financing costs at the first indication of the inconvenience amid the pre-crunch time was to be sure a noteworthy contributory component. The hypothesis was that since the US Federal Reserve would dependably ride to salvage, it seemed well and good to go out on a limb. Apprehension was desensitized and voracity left unencumbered. National investors do have a part in alleviating the extremes of the financial cycle. Yet, it is fundamental that in doing as such, they don't simply stir up more inconvenience.
The second ailment was created by an unreasonable eagerness to bail out bankrupt banks. In a well-working free market, financial specialists would bear the outcomes of poor choices. In the event that a bank fizzled, shareholders and bondholders would endure. In any case, except for Lehman Brothers and a couple of much littler cases, financial specialists were safeguarded. This was reasonable, given the trepidation of circuitous impacts. In any case, a solid body has old cells biting the dust and new ones being conceived. A well-working money related framework additionally needs to take into consideration demise and recharging. Propping up fizzled banks incapacitates the entire economy and sends the wrong message that absurd danger taking won't be rebuffed. The third issue was brought about by the gambles that agents and merchants could appreciate amid the rise. In the case of everything went well, they made a fortune; if everything broken down, citizens got the pieces. As anyone might expect, they spun the roulette wheel. Such privatization of increases and socialization of misfortunes is not beneficial capitalism. It is an exaggeration of the free market.
Eventually any financial framework lays on the assent of the general population. As years of monetary somberness take their toll, the test is to demonstrate that capitalism can be sound. That requires changes in both structures and brain set. On both sides of the Atlantic there is a developing accord that the major money related foundations have turned out to be too enormous and complex to oversee. Controllers have started to verbalize what should be finished. Banks ought to be littler with numerous recommending that there ought to be a reasonable partition in the middle of retail and venture managing an account. All the more extensively, we have dismissed what banking should do. Banks assume a crucial part in every single cutting edge economies; however, that part is not to expect an enormous measure of danger, with the drawback misfortunes secured by society.
Conclusion
The future of liberal democracy relies on execution, not on some acquired morally induced qualification. The development as the predominant regularizing worldview in the twentieth century owed much to the actuality and recognition that it was instrumental in the ascent of flourishing in Europe and the US. Western governments need to demonstrate that political morality is not some gadget to be connected specifically or suspended at whatever the point helpful. For it is decisively exemptions made for the sake of a regularly questionable national intrigue that has prompted the present crisis of radicalism, and revived confidence in dictatorship as a supplier of public goods.
The world is confronting a double development challenge on how to handle the present crisis and how to guarantee long haul maintainable development considering the populace blast, the limited supply of regular assets and the developing risks from environmental change. It is too soon to state with assurance that the measures which the EU has taken to date to will resolve the present crisis. In any case, in the event that they will fail then there will be unavoidable ramifications for the euro. In some regions, totalitarian administrations may figure out how to stay in power. However, from a worldwide point of view, there is space for the best.

Reference
Hirst, Paul. (2000). Democracy and governance. Debating governance, 13-35.
Lijphart, Arend. (1969). Consociational democracy. World politics, 21(02), 207-225.
Przeworski, Adam. (2000). Democracy and development: political institutions and well-being in the world, 1950-1990 (Vol. 3): Cambridge University Press.