Does democracy actually ensure rule by the people?

Answer 1

Well , the definition of "democracy" is "rule by the people", so yes.

But:

Not all (or maybe i should say very, very few) governments that call themselves "democracies" actually are democratic.
It depends on who you ask and it depends on who you ask if it is a positive thing. Pure democracy is in essence mob rule, it forces people to look at two extremes as a "one size fits all" approach which often times trivializes the issue at hand. Pure democracy can lead to situations akin to banning people from writing with their left hand because the majority of people are right-handed and therefore the majority (right-handers) can enforce their will on the minority (left-handers). It is for this reason that the US government was designed first as a limited government with a democracy secondary. It is why there is the Bill of Rights, set things that the government cannot overrule even with a majority vote. In most cases rule by each person individually is a better and more free way of looking at things. For example, rather than preventing left-handed people from writing with their left hand, both sides simply let each person choose which hand to write with because it doesn't affect them. The opposite of pure democracy is not a Dictatorship, communism or socialism, yes, that can be a opposite, but its not -the- opposite. The ability for each individual to choose their own path that doesn't affect others harmfully, is in direct contrast to traditional concepts of democracy, but allows the rule of the people, meaning each person in a nation individually rather than the people as a unified whole which often times leads to abuse. I will close with this statement: Yes, this is opinion, there are many people who have all different views on the subject, but since you asked an opinion question, I am giving you my opinion, that isn't to say it isn't backed up with facts, but I'm sure if another answerer on here would answer this question you might get a radically different answer.

Answer 2

It depends on who you ask and it depends on who you ask if it is a positive thing. Pure democracy is in essence mob rule, it forces people to look at two extremes as a "one size fits all" approach which often times trivializes the issue at hand. Pure democracy can lead to situations akin to banning people from writing with their left hand because the majority of people are right-handed and therefore the majority (right-handers) can enforce their will on the minority (left-handers). It is for this reason that the US government was designed first as a limited government with a democracy secondary. It is why there is the bill of rights, set things that the government cannot overrule even with a majority vote. In most cases rule by each person individually is a better and more free way of looking at things. For example, rather than preventing left-handed people from writing with their left hand, both sides simply let each person choose which hand to write with because it doesn't affect them. The opposite of pure democracy is not a dictatorship, communism or socialism, yes, that can be a opposite, but its not -the- opposite. The ability for each individual to choose their own path that doesn't affect others harmfully, is in direct contrast to traditional concepts of democracy, but allows the rule of the people, meaning each person in a nation individually rather than the people as a unified whole which often times leads to abuse. I will close with this statement: Yes, this is opinion, there are many people who have all different views on the subject, but since you asked an opinion question, I am giving you my opinion, that isn't to say it isn't backed up with facts, but I'm sure if another answerer on here would answer this question you might get a radically different answer.

Answer 3

When you look at all the unpopular legislation pushed down our throats lately, I'd say not so much. Our will is ignored, and major changes are being made without being put to a popular vote.