It is often said that man-made problems can be solved with man-made solutions. Yet our very existence amongst each other causes probably the biggest and most practically difficult problem of all. Simply by inhabiting this earth as a social creature, it falls upon ourselves to decide how we should run our society. Henceforth, the creation of political systems, which has proved to be an eternal debate with an infinite number of opinions, but is there actually an ideal solution?

You may wish to answer this question by deciding what qualifies as an effective solution. Do we say to ourselves that by surviving amongst each other, forming a globalised and interconnected world with different political systems persisting simultaneously, we are the living proof of a real working product in the flesh? If this is the case, then yes, whichever way the world is currently operating can be viewed as the proper solution.

On the other hand, you may look at the injustices and inequalities amongst nations and the world itself, then decide on an alternative view. Either a better political system exists or we have not yet found or installed it. Or you might even think this could be one of the only man-made problems that has no solution of our own making. Your overall level of optimism and outlook on life will likely guide your answer to this issue.

Even as somebody who tries to see the best in people and look positively at the world, I struggle to see how our current global political landscape can be called desirable. In my simple view, a political system should aim to reduce inequality and strengthen society as a whole, not just certain individuals in said society. Yet global inequality is somehow greater in our modern world than it was 200 years ago (Milanovic, 2011). At what point do we need to take a step back and consider the idea of something else?

Could it be possible to install a perfectly moral autocratic ruler that had absolute power and influence over the global landscape, with a free reign to unilaterally reduce inequality? In principle this is probably the most effective way of governance, however, even the most idealistic person can recognise that humans are a highly corruptible species. Not to mention that one person's idea of a sound moral decision could vary greatly to the next person.

Another potential solution that might seem helpful in principle is the concept of an anarchist society in which there is minimal government influence and the community of workers run their own lives. Even though it may be an easier and more effective way of managing each specific area to its individual needs, when applied to the real world it begins to look questionable. Our inherent desire to acquire more resources and land, along with our current global interconnectedness would surely provide too much friction for this solution to be smoothly rolled out on a world level.

So just because democracy currently rules the roost in terms of political systems, does that mean we should just assume that it is the best way to run our society? In basic terms, anyone who values both freedom and organisation would rightly presume democracy to be our best and most viable method of running society. However, a more nuanced view could be worth considering.

Unfortunately, we live in an age of misinformation and corruption, whether you live in a democracy or not. We could sit down for hours and talk about a so-called beacon of democracy like the UK or the US and name countless details of lobbying, offshore tax havens, legal loopholes, and dodgy donations. Some will decide to listen to mainstream news channels, and others will opt for social media news outlets for their information. Each has its own potential benefits. Yet each of them can conceivably drive home their own agenda to their listeners and accept funding from sources unknown to the consumer of that news. These private agendas have placed people in power for centuries, which is proof that democracy has its faults.

Expanding upon this idea is the notion that the general populace is just not intelligent enough to vote on the complicated and intricate matters of government. I myself will admit that even though I have a keen interest in following politics, I am not educated enough to properly know the extent to which an economic plan will actually achieve its intended goals. I cannot possibly make an accurate forecast of a country’s economic performance based on multiple socio-economic factors that are constantly changing. However, many people often confuse not being properly educated with being stupid and unimaginably naive.

While most people are not experts on matters of government, I do believe that the majority of people in the world can recognise when they are being lied to. Governments may try to conceal their dirty tricks and even succeed many times in pulling the wool over people’s eyes, although eventually some form of the truth will likely come to light.

A great example of democracy in action is the UK general election result of 2024, in which the Conservative Party got obliterated. What preceded this annihilation was 14 years of corroding the people’s trust, scandal by scandal. They could well have still managed to conceal some other wrongdoings; however, I lost count of the ones that did make the news. There would not be enough space in this article for me to name each one, but what I can say is that their deceitful actions took the public's intelligence for granted and saw them booted out of office. All this on the back of gaining a decent majority themselves five years earlier.

I have to say that this result was one that I had previously not seen coming for a long time. A younger version of myself believed that the Conservatives grip and influence on the media would protect their image. Thankfully, I was wrong. The country gained its senses and realised it was being abused by its representatives. This is democracy. Admittedly, it is not a perfect system and is open to abuse. Nevertheless, it does give people a voice and a possibility of action, something that cannot always be said for authoritarian regimes.

People may still wish to believe that a better political system exists, and looking at the world, I cannot really argue with them. Although out of the current crop, I would argue that democracy is best placed to prevent or at least resist persecution, oppression, and outright corruption. Therefore, until we find a better solution, democracy will just have to do, at least for now.