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.
+10,000 for your excellent post.