Statesmen and politicians have discussed long and loud and loud that a particular form of Government is better than the other. But the English poet Goldsmith considers all such discussions as entirely foolish. In his opinion, different forms of government are all alike. It all depends upon the way a particular form of government is administered. Good administration is the essential thing; the form of government is no significance. A bad and unjust an administration would make the people unhappy even under the best form of government.
Monarchy is usually considered as the worst kind of government. Monarchs are despots, they know no law, nor reason, but govern according to their own sweet will. The people are ever at the mercy of the whims of a single individual. There is no doubt about that, but does history not tell us of monarchs who had unlimited powers, but who ever their powers with restraint and made the people happy and prosperous. Ram Rajya is an example of a monarch, who held the good of his people at heart and governed justly and nobly. These examples clearly prove that even the worst form of government can become a boon for the people if it is justly administered by a conscientious ruler.
Similarly, dictatorship is condemned by all as it denies liberty to the people, and places them at the mercy of a single administrator. The people are reduced to mere machines or automation, which are controlled by the dictator and work according to his dictates. The misdeeds of Hitler, Mussolini, etc., are pointed out as examples of the evils of dictatorship. But this is only one side of the picture. For even a dictator can do much good administration is carried on. For examples, president Naser of Egypt was a dictator. But the people were happy in his regime. Through his good administration and wise policies, he brought peace and prosperity to the people of Egypt. He was a popular ruler; the people loved him as he had their good alone at his heart.
On the other hand, democracy is universally praised as the best form of government. It is called the government of the people, for the people, by the people. Under this form of government, all have equality and liberty. They can change the government, if they are not satisfied with it through a vote of no-confidence. England, America and Switzerland are held out as examples of the benefits that democracy confers upon the people. There is no doubt about this.
But even a democracy becomes a curse for the people when it is not well administered. Just consider the case of Pakistan. It was a democracy in the beginning. But the politicians were all corrupt. So, the administration ruined financially. The life of the people became hell. The country was ruined financially. The prices continued to rise and widespread starvation was at hand. But the situation was saved by the emergence of the than military dictator, president Ayub Khan. He rooted out corruption and inefficiency from the administration.
Thus the view of poet is perfectly correct. Form of government is immaterial, good administration is the primary thing.