>>>I would rather have king that respected my individual rights than 60% of the population that don’t.<<<
Too bad. That is a kind of thinking leading to tyranny.
King is not obliged to respect your individual rights, he is a master and you are his subject. It is pure stupidity to subdue yourself to something like that, which can respect your rights or not depending on it’s own will.
No matter how flawed a democracy can be, it has a mechanism to protect freedoms of individuals.
As any other tool, democracy might be abused or used improperly but it doesn’t mean you have to reject it for that reason.
Ditto for an unrestrained democracy. I think you might have stumbled into my point.
It is pure stupidity to subdue yourself to something like that, which can respect your rights or not depending on it’s own will.
Ditto for unrestrained democracy. You have definitely found the kernel.
No matter how flawed a democracy can be, it has a mechanism to protect freedoms of individuals.
Oh, you are so, so wrong. It is a mechanism for determining what the majority will do, there is nothing about it that ensures or protects freedom. At its worst, it is nothing more than the Hell's Angels showing up at your local beauty pageant and taking a binding majority vote on who is going to have sex with who. In the words of the Founders, it is not a single tyrant 10,000 miles away, but 10,000 tyrants a mile away.
As any other tool, democracy might be abused or used improperly but it doesn’t mean you have to reject it for that reason.
I didn't reject it as a tool. I rejected it as a synonym for liberty, which it clearly is not.
And yes, if I can't live in a free society that respects my individual liberty, then I would prefer to be in charge of the unfree society, because when a majority of people decide to abuse you, I reject that they have a moral imperative through percentage of numbers to do so.
Democracy is a great tool for people to decide on issues that have nothing to do with freedom and liberty.
When people start voting on issues of freedom and liberty, then democracy is a tool for tyranny.
Hitler overwhelmingly won a plebiscite in what was by all accounts a fair voting process. Do you think the Jews were therefore better off than they were under the Kaiser? What is the majority opinion in Muslim countries concerning individual religious liberty? Wiping out the minority is self reinforcing to a tyrannical democracy. Yes, the majority (of any particular moment) won't vote to kill itself, but the minority is totally at their mercy (or lack there of).