🇳🇱
We have this misconception that #Democracy is executing the will of the majority... But thats not true.
Any democracy that gives 51% of people what they want, even when that is abusive to the wishes of the 49% will not survive, that leads to revolution... democracy has never been about majority rule.
What democracy is about is rule by the people, ALL the people. Any successful system will reach agreements that nearly everyone will be happy enough with so as not to pick up a gun and shoot the other side for oppressing them. Its about compromising enough that everyone can settle rather than agree.
This is exactly why the electorial college and other elements of government exist rather than a simple 51% rule... because we want to make sure any idea has atleast some level of support from most represented groups... so in the end the ones who may not like the vote can at least live with it.
@freemo fun fact: in ancient Greece, democracy was all about the "power" (i.e. 'crazia') to the citzens (i.e. 'demos'), through a majority vote during an assembly, after a free discussion. There were no clear concepts of individual rights and respect of the minority, like in modern democracies. There were no supreme constitutional rights: if the majority vote decides something, this will be effective.
The assembly was used for direct government, and also for judging people in trials. For example Socrate was condemned from a jury of 500 or more citizens. They did not applied codified laws, but they decided that what he was doing was a danger for the values of the community, because the majority of the assembly decided so.
When the people who run a system are corrupt then no rules, no matter how perfect they may be will ever serve justice.
Rules only work when the system enforces them fairly for everyone.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
@antares
Theoretically, we can improve current democratic process, laws, etc... instead of making a revolution. For example, a separation between speculative/financial banks and economic/commercial banks will reduce a lot the power of finance.
In practice, we live inside a soft-power oligarchy, so also if it seems feasible, there will be always something preventing these type of changes.
(there are a few simple interest devices that might be tenable, though this is playing with fire.)