> media, courts, bureaucracy
This is a gross redefinition of democracy.
But we can go down this path if you wish. If a judge rules that only men can vote by their interpretation of the constitution, is that democracy?
This is a gross redefinition of democracy.
But we can go down this path if you wish. If a judge rules that only men can vote by their interpretation of the constitution, is that democracy?
First of all no single judge will be capable of upholding this, but let's say the entire judiciary has indeed decided to disenfranchise half the population I'd say they are grossly failing at their job. But anyway, your question was: is that democracy?
Well, it depends. In my democracy it would not be, because freedom is a big part of what democracy means here - even if The People decide freedom is unimportant. That's what we don't like about naked democracy, it easily leads to mob rule in which freedom is stripped and the tyrannical majority overrides all other concerns.
In my mind democracy is a broad system of checks, balances and institutions in which the will of the people is just one element. An important one, but definitely not the only one.
Just for entertainment consider this: if The People vote to keep women out of the electoral process, is that democracy?
If a policy is enacted that I don’t like - which happens daily - then I shrug and reinvigorate my will to vote next time around.
I don’t really see how your conclusion follows from anything I said.