Is it compatible with democracy?

Question

Democracy in real sense imply rule by majority. Suppose a majority of population is virtually illiterate and believe in a number of supersitions and evil social customs and a system full of sub-human evil practices. Would it not be compible with law to continue with the evil system supported by majority of the ill educated group as due regard to the preferences of the majority justify every damn thing.

Is it compatible with democracy to frame rules/laws in accordance with the justifications given by few right minded learned persons?

What is true democracy, an egalitarian system guided by few right spiritted persons or a discriminatory system guided by beastly instincts of the majority of the people?

Assured tenure and continued practice sometimes makes difference in the attitude of the right apearing minds. Sometimes they too align with the majority to avoid unnecessary criticism and earn support for unseen unwanted circumtances. The location of the right kind of things seems to keep changes from one group to the other. Is it...

Democratic principles does not seem to keep always in tune with majority,s shortsighted intrests. It is for the majority to adjust itself in accordance with the democratic principles. And democratic principles are acceptable to both majority and minority. If agrred to this, than what does the concept of majority and minority signify in a democratic set up?

Answer 1

That's why we have an independent judiciary who gets to keep their job for life. They are not subject to the tyranny of the majority... yet they are supposed to give the majority wide lattitude to do what it wants. The judiciary steps in only when the majority crosses that line.

So true democracy is potentially beastly but what we have is better due to those few right sprited persons.

Answer 2

A true democracy would be a tyranny of the majority. Every little thing decided by majority vote, and everyone has to comply. Which end of your soft-boiled egg do you open? (That was Lilliput.) How should you wear your hair? And of course, then everyone would be the same to the extent they complied with the majority rule.

Fortunately, that is not what America or any other country really is. We have a republic, not a democracy. We elect representatives to be the best available among us (in theory, folks; in practice the best don't run for office), and then we leave the law-making up to them. They don't do all that well, but at least they can't do as much as the people who want real democracy would suggest.

How about Liberty instead?

Answer 3

Of course democracy is the majority of people willing and attended by little group of people who working as per their own idea especially when there is grey zone. The laws division will every time issue a new guidance to clarify attendance to work out. Before the ordinance is issued, their will be some (holy-man) wise man, experienced-man, and or authority to come out to speak out their ideals. Which is the best we can say the democray nowadays running. On the other hand, the little group of people they may speech out their own ideals according to them own benefits which is not easy to find out. It take long time to find out and destroy the previous laws. These are not fair to the majority. We are still working out how to minimize the mistake by putting out law to help benefit a little group of people. I can say that religious sometimes can help into this situation. Not every religious can help unless those followers take off their holy book and sit down to discuss what is the best way to control selfish and doggy.

Answer 4

Good question for philosophical debate!
You're right about true democracy, so the question boils down to one of justice. Is it just for the elite of a society to make the laws for the misguided masses? Well, that is how this country was initially set up with our republic and electoral college. That doesn't answer your question. For interest sake, read Plato;'s Republic. In essence, I think, government is not fair. Yet, with humanity's faults and self seeking, egocentric tendencies, not having a government is worse than having one. In purist language, anarchy reigns supreme.