Due to my development of a blatant disregard for any type of formal learning, I told my examiners to define their questions better. I wrote about an entire page on why their question "democracy is more desirable than any other feasible alternative" was too subjective to be thoroughly answered. Sociology and Political Science can go fuck itself - there's nothing falsifiable about conjectures that can't be refuted. I'd much rather call my Political Science degree a Political Theology degree - there's a lot of faith and belief in which rational thought is supposed to belie.
Because thousands of Tibetans march on the street because they hate the Chinese government mean that they desire democracy? We assume they do. We believe that democracy and freedom are hand-in-hand, indissoluble, colloidal. In this democracy of mine, we lock up artists, deny same-sex couples to formalize their relationship and treat our adults like children by depriving them of the chance to fuck up and learn for themselves. If you believe democracy is freedom, remember that when you say something is, it is not!
That exam was almost as stupid as the time one of my old high-school mates gave me shit for putting too many print articles in the school magazine. That isn't relevant. But it was just as retarded.