this post was submitted on 22 Sep 2025
11 points (82.4% liked)

micro-blog-[ish]

135 readers
2 users here now

A place to say what you have to say, without requiring any context, theme, arguments, or ceremony. Be civil.

founded 10 months ago
MODERATORS
xia@lemmy.sdf.org
11
Would you still support democracy if 51% of the people wanted to harm you? (lemmy.sdf.org)
submitted 2 weeks ago by xia@lemmy.sdf.org to c/microblogish@lemmy.sdf.org
20 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 6 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

Those are all secondary things added on top of pure democracy. None of those protections are intrinsic to democracy in general.

[–] shawn1122@sh.itjust.works 7 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

I wouldn't support a direct / minimalist democracy without guarantee of civil liberties even if I was part of the majority.

Too close to mob rule for me.

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 2 points 2 weeks ago

That seems like exactly what OP is asking

[–] guy@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

Depends on your definition of democracy

[–] agamemnonymous@sh.itjust.works 1 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

In context of the question, we're talking simple, basic, direct democracy. Whatever 50%+1 of the population wants, goes.

[–] guy@piefed.social 1 points 2 weeks ago

Those are all secondary things added on top of pure democracy.

Pure democracy is a question of definition. Greek democracy? Pre 1960-ish US democracy? Only men can vote? The adult population has the right to vote but no right to free assembly and speech?