Yes, that would be the most correct way I can think of, and the way in place to deal with all things here.
But in some cases, such as minorities being underprivileged, by deification (minority = smaller segment of society, so a smaller voting block) they could never have any vote result in a change desirable to them but not desirable to those not underprivileged; that is why Jim Crow lasted so long. So how do we address dissatisfaction of minorities?
As to what is happening now, that is not democracy either, in fact, it is not even legal or any allowed method available to us. It is basically 'mob rule', being backed up by what I would call 'Governance via social media'. Put another way, we now decide things based on how many FaceTwit 'likes' or 're- twits' or whatever it is that gets 'them asses' stirred up. Because our politicians, starting with the top politician in the entire country, are using / working through / deciding events and especially, terrified of having a social media frenzy turn against them (other than the top politician, who uses FaceTwit as a method of antagonism at 3:00 AM apparently), the law enforcement of the country has also been held in check while these mobs roam and perform whatever the current 'hot thing' is. Right at the moment, it is tearing down or permanently defacing statues of Confederates.
Democracy has never faced an assault anything like this one, and I am not sure it can withstand it. Then again, no one has ever had Democracy anyway (and for this discussion, Democracy and Republicanism are interchangeable, it is merely the way we would refer to a voter- led gov't with the finer details of each system not meaning anything). Worse yet, it strips off a protective layer that used to protect us from ourselves; while in theory anyone in the US could be elected to office, even high office (most of us here are viable to be President of the US I believe, there are only three simple qualifications), reality buffered those offices. To run for, say, US Senator, a person had to has enough clout and perceived ability to win to get any appreciable media coverage, and the entire structure (media, university speaking invitations, etc., etc.) were restricted by nature. So the system itself thinned the herd of available people down to some level of 'acceptable'. Now, we could have a game show host run, and possibly even win the Presidential election with no screening whatsoever by the older system of media and such..... hey, in fact,...... :-)
And that, my friends, is why magazine capacity has increased steadily in the last 100 years. And I ain't talkin' about the size of the rack in the bathroom.
And while I am not suggesting it, I am a bit surprised that some of this mob action is being tolerated by the OpFor in the citizenry all over the south. I would have thought at least a few of these 'statue raiders' would have met up with a group of other minded locals by now but it has not happened.
Brian
Exactly, there is no easy answer with these situations. Other than, as a democracy, it should be settled by orderly and informed public hearings and voting and orderly procedures- be it leaving them be, moving them, discarding them, adding other statues or signs, whatever. Like many people, I can sympathize with all sides on the issue but it is something that each locality will need to deal with on their own. Not national media and not outsiders coming into localities stirring up riots.
