A democracy is a raft of groaning logs cobbled together and manoeuvred in the direction of public opinion by diverse group kites and tug boats. Taken over a long time scale, it may not appear to be going anywhere in particular, but the citizens suppose there is progress because the scenery is constantly changing.

Almost any form of democracy... wherein a substantial proportion of the citizens influence the selection of the executive members... is valued by the generations which can remember the abuses of a former monocracy. As new generations appear, if the worst extremes of monarchies and dictatorships become abstract experiences of historical recollection, then participation in the essential processes of a democracy become diminished in priority. With time, a democracy can exhibit symptoms of appearing to be a social group organized such that each individual has the apathetic right not to cast their vote during an election, and the civil right to protest violently when the results are not in their favour. If it degenerates to becoming a process of distributing propaganda to the apathetic and the cynical, there is a very sharp and unpleasant correction on the not too distant horizon.

The supposed ideal of a democracy, wherein 'everybody' registers their preference on an issue... and the course of action of the executive is directed by the numerical result... is never realized. All democracies exclude those individuals and groups which do not have the political strength to assert their inclusion... youth, slaves, criminals, undesirables, residents, non-citizens, immigrants, tourists, and so on... In effect, a democracy is a coalition of compatible groups, mutually agreeing to abide by a cumulative voting system, and to exclude any other groups deemed to be a threat to the coalition.

As a society, a democracy must also be concerned to control those groups that potentially threaten its survival....and there are no shortage of those. It should be noted that the imperialistic subjugation of external countries would therefore be a serious disturbance to its stability, because the size and numbers of the groups external to its coalition is dramatically increased, and as a consequence so is its ability to maintain equilibrium. A democracy might be organized enough to defend itself vigorously from external forces, but performing an act of aggressive invasion for the purpose of territorial acquisition, will mark the beginning of something which is not democracy.

In any form of government... be it democracy, monocracy, or otherwise... those aspiring to power and assets within it will devise means to manipulate whatever is available. For a democracy, such manipulation tends to revolve around everything from the guidance and control of journalists, the media, and a deregulated financial system, to a direct interference with the vote counting process. The affluent and power-seeking take over the means of influencing opinions and hence bias the voting events to facilitate their perpetuation. Once so 'authenticated' by the populace they then have the 'mandate' to manipulate the system further to enhance the dominance of the power-seeking phenomenon. The citizens of a democracy should ensure that as many as possible of the avaricious and powerful are frustrated, obstructed and completely pissed off. They must obtain democratic regulatory and administrative control of the money system. It is essential that this includes ensuring an equitable distribution of financial resources amongst all the citizens, and the prevention of the extreme polarities of 'rich' and 'poor'.

Whenever the rules are transgressed, the judgements brought down in a democracy, should also be democratically controlled. A professional judiciary should be prevented from gaining control of the legal system just as vigorously as any other group with a vested self-interest. Thus it should be an elected panel of informed citizens who are professionally charged with the delivery of a judgement. They should be citizens from diverse callings, trained in the broad requirements of legal proceedings, elected to office by the local populace and retained only on their performance and acumen. A jury of legally naive citizens, on the other hand, selected by officers of a judiciary whose objective is to bias its evaluations towards a pre-determined point of view... rather than to discover the probable factual sequence of events... is less than democratic.