Democracy is Illegitimate
Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner.
Democracy is not freedom, morality, or rule of law.
Democracy seems better than it actually is because it is relatively new and because it is has usually followed bad monarchies or theocracies, and thus those new democracies consisted of people who had learned the evils of government (i.e. taxation, inflation, regulation, conformism, censorship, double standards, cronyism, false flags, gun confiscation, democide, genocide, slavery). What most people don’t know is that those same things can also happen under the newer concept of democracy too once the culture who formed the democracy no longer understands why it revolted.
Democracy seems better than it actually is in comparison to other forms of government because it has primarily existed in the age of radio, then television, and now the Internet and digital cameras. Therefore the evil forces at work in all governments have naturally been forced to evolve more slowly, be more secretive, hide behind more layers of front men, and adopt far better PR mechanisms — all to stand up to greater scrutiny.
Democracy seems better than it actually is because it was created and evolving at a time when the people were armed and informed similarly to how the government was armed and informed, and thus governments had to be more respectful of the people. For example, not that long after the printing press and the musket were invented, if a government said, “You will conform because the Pope says the Bible backs our actions.”, then the people could say, “I have a Bible, and I have a musket, and I disagree.”
Democracy seems better than it actually is because it was usually created with a constitution and/or a bill of rights that captured the lessons learned by the generation who revolted.
Although democracy is not inherently good, it is not as inherently evil as less democratic forms of government because it must please a larger segment of the population.
Therefore, government has improved less because of democracy, and more because of armed citizenry, revolutions, radio, TV, Internet, digital cameras, and constitutions that incorporated lessons learned by those who revolted, and because those lessons learned limited government to those actions that pleased a larger percentage of the people, which has slowed the propagation of evil.
Unfortunately, that is still not good enough or else we would not have the problems we have today. In fact many of the problems we have today are the unintended consequences of past government action. One cannot overemphasize that democracy can still be very evil. In fact, American democracy today is in many ways more evil than the English monarchy from which America seceded. Consider Obama’s DHS and consider What is Wrong with the People.
The path forward is clear. Why not limit government to only those actions that please an even larger percentage of the people?
"Direct democracy (also known as pure democracy) is a form of democracy in which people decide (e.g. vote on, form consensus on) policy initiatives directly, as opposed to a representative democracy in which people vote for representatives who then decide policy initiatives… Two leading forms of direct democracy are participatory democracy and deliberative democracy." ~ Wikipedia
"Why not limit government to those actions that please an even larger percentage of the people?"
The only good government seems one that can be freely and without threat of 'sanctions', imprisonment, etc., opted-out of; one that is non-coercive. In other words, the only good government is no government (if that is one wants, and many do).
The moment a group of people force their will on others, it's already game over.
A moral government is one that (a) only punishes citizens for harming other citizens, not for failing to adequately participate in the majority system, and (b) expropriates and appropriates equally and without exception. Everything else is tyranny.
Relatively new?
The term “democracy” first appeared in ancient Greek political and philosophical thought in the city-state of Athens during classical antiquity.[23][24] The word comes from demos, “common people” and kratos, strength.[25] Led by Cleisthenes, Athenians established what is generally held as the first democracy in 508–507 BC. Cleisthenes is referred to as “the father of Athenian democracy.”[26]
Athenian democracy took the form of a direct democracy, and it had two distinguishing features: the random selection of ordinary citizens to fill the few existing government administrative and judicial offices,[27] and a legislative assembly consisting of all Athenian citizens.[28] All eligible citizens were allowed to speak and vote in the assembly, which set the laws of the city state. However, Athenian citizenship excluded women, slaves, foreigners (μέτοικοι / métoikoi), non-landowners, and men under 20 years of age.[citation needed][contradictory] The exclusion of large parts of the population from the citizen body is closely related to the ancient understanding of citizenship. In most of antiquity the benefit of citizenship was tied to the obligation to fight war campaigns.[29]
Athenian democracy was not only direct in the sense that decisions were made by the assembled people, but also the most direct in the sense that the people through the assembly, boule and courts of law controlled the entire political process and a large proportion of citizens were involved constantly in the public business.[30] Even though the rights of the individual were not secured by the Athenian constitution in the modern sense (the ancient Greeks had no word for “rights”[31]), the Athenians enjoyed their liberties not in opposition to the government but by living in a city that was not subject to another power and by not being subjects themselves to the rule of another person.[32]