It's the only way Obama can say things like "Don't let them take away your democracy" while the DNC actively rejects things that are undeniably popular among a majority of all Americans, let alone people who register as democrats.
It's the only way Obama can say things like "Don't let them take away your democracy" while the DNC actively rejects things that are undeniably popular among a majority of all Americans, let alone people who register as democrats.
I think you are oversimplifying it. If you want it to be real democracy, you must also be seen, and be valid.
Which is why democracy is incompatible with capitalism. If your needs are only valid in a market context, if you are poor, you don't exist. If you can't afford water, your thirst doesn't exist. If you can't afford a politician, your needs don't exist.
What does this mean? I think democracy is extremely simple. Everyone gets a vote, and the majority rules.
The mechanisms for ensuring that individuals can be seen, heard, or validated should come from that majority.
I was referring to the empty lib phrase "I see you, I hear you, you are valid". In all seriousness democracy is a bit more complicated than relying on the majority, as that majority can (and has) easily hurt minorities.
Ahh gotcha. This turned semantic then we agree I think. The difference is that I wouldn't lump those things into "democracy." To me democracy is literally that simple. The result (as you point out) is that sometimes democracy can lead to injustice. If I might try and put words in your mouth to demonstrate this:
I would say "achieving democracy isn't enough if there is still injustice in the world"
You would say "if there is injustice, then you don't have democracy"