[EM] language/framing quibble

[Kristofer Munsterhjelm]

Juho Laatu wrote:
> --- On Tue, 17/2/09, Fred Gohlke <fredgohlke at verizon.net> wrote:
> 
>> Whether or not the US is a democracy is a semantic
>> question.
> 
> I use this term roughly so that a country
> is democratic if people are able to make
> change x if they are determined to make
> x happen. There should be no fear of coup,
> revenge, police or other serious personal
> problems. This is the lower limit, not a
> definition of a perfect democratic system.

This is somewhat offtopic, but consider a country where you have a ruler 
who makes decisions in a dictatorial manner, but where those decisions 
can be opposed by a supermajority. Would such a country be democratic? 
The supermajority of the people could make x happen (or at least make 
not-x not happen), yet their influence is very slight.

Perhaps democracy is a scale, not a point, with direct democracy on one 
end and "elected kings" on the other? An elected king would be one who 
rules with absolute power for as long as he lives (unless he resigns), 
except that when the old king resigns or dies, there's an election for 
the new king.