Modern Democracy was a form of pacification to discourage violent and - sometimes necessary in the course of human events - uprisings of the people to overthrow their government. Instead the rulers can engineer a set of problems and solutions and let us think we are making the choice. Whatever the result, there's a sense of collective ownership. If we don't like it then "well the people voted for this" and "we just gotta vote harder next time."

In the US we had two large revolutionary uprisings. The second one failed and the Northern states imposed "American Democracy" on the losers forever. (though many of its worse aspects weren't put in place until the 1960s) Elements of this pacifying force were borrowed to create the "Liberal Democracies" of Europe. Neither form has anything to do with liberty or less tyrannical forms of governance.

So all I'm adding to your comment is that the implementation went the other way. The US Constitution wasn't perfect but it already solved many problems of government. Increasing the scope of "Democracy" as a bandaid to fix problems was itself an adaptation of the State to prevent a real cure to our ills from being pursued.

Modern Democracy was a form of pacification to discourage violent and - sometimes necessary in the course of human events - uprisings of the people to overthrow their government. Instead the rulers can engineer a set of problems and solutions and let us think we are making the choice. Whatever the result, there's a sense of collective ownership. If we don't like it then "well the people voted for this" and "we just gotta vote harder next time."

In the US we had two large revolutionary uprisings. The second one failed and the Northern states imposed "American Democracy" on the losers forever. (simplifying obviously, many of its worse aspects weren't put in place until the 1960s) Elements of this pacifying force were borrowed to create the "Liberal Democracies" of Europe. Neither form has anything to do with liberty or less tyrannical forms of governance.

So all I'm adding to your comment is that the implementation went the other way. The US Constitution wasn't perfect but it already solved many problems of government. Increasing the scope of "Democracy" as a bandaid to fix problems was itself an adaptation of the State to prevent a real cure to our ills from being pursued.

Modern Democracy was a form of pacification to discourage violent and - sometimes necessary in the course of human events - uprisings of the people to overthrow their government. Instead the rulers can engineer a set of problems and solutions and let us think we are making the choice. Whatever the result, there's a sense of collective ownership. If we don't like it then "well the people voted for this" and "we just gotta vote harder next time."

In the US we had two large revolutionary uprisings. The second one failed and the Northern states imposed "American Democracy" on the losers forever. Elements of this pacifying force were borrowed to create the "Liberal Democracies" of Europe. Neither form has anything to do with liberty or less tyrannical forms of governance.

So all I'm adding to your comment is that the implementation went the other way. The US Constitution wasn't perfect but it already solved many problems of government. Increasing the scope of "Democracy" as a bandaid to fix problems was itself an adaptation of the State to prevent a real cure to our ills from being pursued.