Depends what you mean by democracy
Re: Democracy In Retreat, Terry Glavin, March 10. I have an aversion to democracy. Don’t get me wrong; it’s OK as a mechanism to select representatives. But its basic meaning is wrong for an overall political principle: democracy does not mean “freedom,” it means “majority rule” or “might makes right,” i.e., coercion.
I prefer a system that puts freedom as the top political value, so that voting of majority rule is outlawed from breaching freedom.
I go along with the American founders. When asked what kind of system they had created, Benjamin Franklin said, “A republic, if you can keep it.” He did not name the minor aspect of voting or democracy. Their fundamental principle was freedom, as expressed in individual rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Since then, the European influence for egalitarian outcomes has distorted the meaning of rights from freedom to entitlements to (ironically) enslave others by means of democratic votes.
Thus it’s a disappointment to see the U.S. at No. 20 on The Economist magazine’s Democracy Index — not because this is too low, as Terry Glavin says, but because it’s too high in conflating the principles of democratic coercion with freedom. Ergo, the higher rank of Canada means it is worse in substituting majority coercion (e.g., more socialism) for individual freedom.