Is Democracy Really the Best Form of Government?

It is inarguably a prevalent notion that democracy is the best form of government. Some developed countries practicing full democracy, such as the United States have been on the frontline of advocating for democracy in the countries that are considered non-democratic. Consequently, the whole world has been led to believe that democracy is the ideal form of government. However, it is debatable as to whether the above is true or not. Basing on the flaws of democracy, it is my belief that countries should have the liberty of implementing their own unique forms of governance that they deem as effective without any foreign advocacy for democracy. Consequently, if the resultant form of government is more effective than a democracy, then it implies that it is the better system.
To start off my argument, I investigate the shortcomings of democracy. There are multiple disadvantages associated with democracy. First, although in democracies the population has the freedom to choose their leaders, they have no control over what the leaders do once they are in power. Its effectiveness is dependent on the loyalty of the leaders to the promises they made to the electorate prior to being elected into power. This explains why there are numerous failed democracies in the world. For instance, Kenya, which considers itself a democracy, held a democratic election in 2002. The elections was judged free and fair by international observers meaning the electorate’s voice had been heard. However, 10 years under the regime that was elected, Kenya has been consistently ranked among the top most corrupt countries in the world with a corruption perception index of 27, placing it at position 139 out of 174 (Transparency International). In this case, the freedom of choice is of no use if an elected leader ends up servicing their own needs. Hitler, who was appointed chancellor in a democratically elected government could not be prevented from spearheading heinous policies that saw him be at the...