There are two types of benefits commonly attributed to democracy: relatively better laws and policies and improved character of participants. John Stuart Mill argued that a democratic method of lawmaking is better than nondemocratic methods in three ways: epistemologically, strategically, and through improving the characters of democratic citizens. (Mill, 1861, chapter 3.) Epistemologically, democracy is the best method of decision-making on the premise that it gives people access to decisions of their choice more often than in any other form of government. Democratic decision-making is believed to be more informed than any other form of government about the interests of citizens and the necessary steps needed to satisfy those interests. Since democracy influences a good number of demos in the field of decision making, it manages to take over data and analytical evaluation of policies and laws. Furthermore, we can say that a broad discussion about democracy improves the evaluative appreciation of the different virtuous ideas that guide people who make decisions. Strategically, democracy is a beneficial political process because it forces decision makers to take into consideration the interests, opinions and rights of the demos in a society. Since democracy provides some power and political capacity to each elected representative, the interests of the people are taken into consideration more than they are taken into account in aristocracy or monarchy. Amartya Sen has provided a compelling statement of this argument, arguing that "there has never been a substantial famine in any independent country with a democratic form of government and a relatively free press." (Sen 1999, 152.) The foundation... ...middle of paper......political system. So we can probably say that the previously raised argument against democracy is not credible and we cannot say that democracy is the basest form of government based on that argument. Second, Plato (Republic, Book VI) argued that “some people are smarter and more moral than others and that person should rule.” Even in this case we can argue that if some people are more intelligent than others then it is not necessary that they have to pronounce on the premise that no one can guarantee the morality of an individual. There is always the possibility that an intelligent person could engage in corrupt or immoral activities. As Aristotle had said “For if liberty and equality, as some think, are found chiefly in democracy, they will be best achieved when all the people share equally in government to the greatest degree”..”