What Can We As Citizens Ordinary People Do To Protect Liberty And Democracy

What is a Liberal democracy?

The system of governance based on the principle of liberalism and democracy.Liberalism seeks to evolve such rule and procedure that would secure liberty of individual while democracy implies the formation of government with the consent of ordinary people. Accordingly, liberal democracy is largely identified by the following characteristics;A—Representative government based on majority rule with due recognition on minority rights.B— More then one political parties freely competing for political power.C—periodic election based on universal adult franchise.D— Political offices not confined to any privileged classE— Accountability of government to the electorateF—protection of civil liberties of citizens (such as freedom of thought and expression, movements, association and assembly etc . Including freedom to criticise government).G—Independence of judiciary from executive and legislative control.

Do you believe that the US is a valid democracy?

Those who claim that USA is not a democracy really mean that USA is not a direct democracy. And since there are no nations that are direct democracies the comment is quite pointless.Democracy (Greek: δημοκρατία, literally "Rule by 'People'") is a system of government where the citizens exercise power by voting. In a direct democracy, the citizens as a whole form a governing body and vote directly on each issue. In a representative democracy the citizens elect representatives from among themselves. These representatives meet to form a governing body, such as a legislature. In a constitutional democracy the powers of the majority are exercised within the framework of a representative democracy, but the constitution limits the majority and protects the minority, usually through the enjoyment by all of certain individual rights, e.g. freedom of speech, or freedom of association.[Democracy - Wikipedia]There are a number of factors that challenge the validity of American democracy:Gerrymandering — Letting candidates choose their voters rather than letting voters choose their candidates. This is a problem unique to USA. Or more correctly, it is a symptom of a greater problem. In all other advanced democracies, politicians do not manage the electoral process.Electoral College — USA has helped set up democratic government in a few nations: West Germany, Japan, Iraq and Afghanistan. In none of these, did American diplomats suggest anything like the Electoral College. One issue with the College is that most states use an all or nothing approach to assigning electors to the College. If 51% of California’s voters vote for the Democrats, 100% of California’s electors will be for the Democrat candidates.Election Financing — running a modern election campaign is an expensive enterprise. Candidates must play a dual role of fundraiser and potential representative of the voters. Financial interests can conflict with voters’ interests. Corporations are established to make money for their investors. They do not invest in election campaigns without an expectation of a return on investment. Dark money and corporate money should be removed from election campaigns.Voter Suppression — again, the running of elections should not be in the hands of politicians.

Why is the US not a real direct democracy?

Let’s say we have direct democracy. It’s voting day, you go to your secure voting website, log in, and prepare to cast your vote on the issues presented.About three issues down, a bill prohibiting black people from sitting at lunch counters comes up. Preposterous! You vote no, of course.Next day, you find out that the measure passed, black people can’t sit at lunch counters.Welcome to the systemic fault of direct democracy: disenfranchisement. You’re right, but more wrong people voted, and now wrong is law. It is often said that democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for dinner. This is why. The minority has to live the way of the majority, and the majority is often wrong. There is no smaller minority than the individual.The example isn’t far-fetched. As early as fifty years ago, that exact scenario would have occurred with direct democracy.Our Framers knew that people, if left to their own devices, i.e., given direct democracy, would run, not walk, back to the chains of tyranny as fast as their feet could carry them. They devised a brilliant system to protect and preserve the rights and liberty of the individual. That is the purpose of a constitutional republic. A representative republic to buffer against the whims and passions of the people against the individual, such as the current ill-will towards Muslims, for example; a cooler head measure. And under a Constitution, restraining the representatives too, limiting what they can do on behalf of the people against the individual.No direct democracy lasts long. As soon as it is discovered that the people can pilfer from the treasury (this happened nearly a hundred years ago), the countdown timer starts ticking. Eventually, the country cannibalizes itself, you can’t pilfer from an empty treasury.