The deception associated with the word, ‘democracy’ has become a point of discussion for modern day’s scholars of political economy. The word has only found valued for liberal democracies and is considered undervalued for other systems which are perceived as non-democratic despite of the fact that this specific word has also been used for other systems of governance as well. This article aimed to show whether the word democracy or democratic norms, suit other systems or not, and if there could be ample reasons for the pursuit of non-democratic governance. The arguments here are based upon the comparison of four basic democratic values: freedom of speech, human rights, electoral process and participation of masses, between democratic and non-democratic systems. Based upon this comparison and the achievements made in two systems in century long struggle, it was found that these values of democratic systems are either working at par with other so-called ‘non-democratic’ systems or dysfunctional in both systems equally. Therefore, it is suggested for developing countries that it is a right time not to intricate with the ‘word’ democracy and build their bond with alternative democratic system as well to get the fruit of upcoming development could be enjoyed by the soul. Finally, a comparison of the output of democracy versus other have also been sought to determine the associated cost of bringing in this branded democracy, which these developing countries are paying. Based on these arguments, it was found that running after just one branded democracy is similar to chasing a wild goose and the time has come to look around and pick other brands which suits better, the norms and incumbent situation of any particular country or nation’s need.
Keywords: Democracy, non-democratic, governance, branded democracy.