>But politics can’t get done by machines.
Can't it?
Democracy is simply voting, which can easily be handled by machines.
Can't it?
Democracy is simply voting, which can easily be handled by machines.
There's quite a lot more to politics, and politics in democracy, than just the act of voting.
Voting is simply voting. If you insist on inventing a new definition, Democracy is a specific mode of a) gathering and representing the political will of the population; and b) a specific mode of forming that political will by the civil society. Voting is just the rather banal part of making the present aggregate political will visible and quantifiable. The most defining part of Democracy happens before the vote.
Its in most political science textbooks, and even on wikipedia, hidden in point 2 of the 4 point definition at the top.
Have a look at most socialist eastern european countries in the 1980s. You had multiple parties, and you could vote. But surly we both wouldn't describe that as democracy. What was missing? Formally, there wasn't much of a difference. Sure, you often had compulsory voting, but Australia has that too.
The missing part was the lack of an independent civic sector. You had no politically relevant NGOs, no independent unions etc. You couldn't simply create a new political party at will. The government was the only actor able to meaningfully influence the political landscape.
Just because you are used to the current legislative system doesn't mean it isn't replaceable.