Abhay says decisions in a democracy are always made faster than in a dictatorship, since democracy…

Why

Abhay's move is a common one — pick a system he genuinely believes is better overall, then assume every single feature of it must also be the better one, including speed. But 'better for protecting people's voice and rights' and 'faster at making decisions' are two entirely separate qualities that don't have to travel together. A dictatorship, where one person or a small group decides without needing wider agreement, can often act very quickly precisely because it skips debate and consultation. A democracy is often genuinely SLOWER on purpose, because it involves discussion, voting, and building agreement among different groups before a decision is made — that slowness is usually the deliberate cost of the very fairness and accountability that makes it valued in the first place. Test: compare how long it takes a school where one teacher decides everything alone to change a rule, versus a school where the change needs a vote from every teacher — the single-decider version moves faster, whatever else it lacks. No, one system being 'better' does not decide every feature: democracies are often valued despite being slower, not because they are faster, and confusing the two hides what the real trade-off actually is.