It's a paradox. If a system is elected and "democratic", how do you prevent a few-well organized and financed special interests from out-organizing and out-spending the more or less inattentive "general population" to ensure that government prioritizes their agenda before the long-term interests of the overall society.

If a government has the authority to toss said special interests off the table, it's not democratic. And when the special interests take control, it ceases to be democratic.

Antoinetta III

Ummm... o.k. I thought this would be "understood", but seems not.

You are not going to have a functional democracy if you have a 'more or less inattentive "general population"', by which I mean a population which does no more than vote at election time. (and yes I know many don't even do that).

That's sort of like calling yourself a cabinet maker because you bought an old hand plane at a garage sale.

This is actually understood much more widely in Europe and elsewhere than it is in North America.