Imagine you were an alien crew that landed on earth to study political systems, and they were told of this wonderful system called Democracy that is based on one man one vote, rule of law, and the concept of equality of persons before the law. They also tell you that the beauty of this system is embodied in the USA. You decide to soak in this wonderful system by taking residence in the USA.
You observe the system for a number of years, and you notice that the US has 50 states of varying sizes in land area and population yet they each of 2 senators with same voting rights in the Senate. You also notice that this great country has an executive president with great powers but three million more people voted for the woman that ran against him.
You are trying to understand this then you read that there is one man in the Senate that gets to decide what the other 99 can even consider. Hmmmm
While pondering this you are told not to worry too much about these two matters because you learn that there is a third branch of government that will right these imbalances. You are excited about this and exclaim 'so there is a way for the people to vote on important matters' and you told no no that there is a body of nine people who get to decide the consequential issues that shape the fabric of the society. You get more excited and ask are these people elected by the popular vote, and you are told no. They are not elected at all. They are appointed for life by that executive and four of them have actually been appointed by executives that lost the popular vote in their election.
Finally, you ask your neighbors to explain this system some more...and they go back to the Constitution which they explain is the foundation of the American experiment and was written in an agrarian society for agrarian times when life expectancy was low. And you ask if this was/is an experiment isnt it time to tweak it some?
This country probably needs a Constitutional Conference.
and is the norm for the vast majority of people who were raised and educated and trained in the US, the definition for democracy above fails to even consider economic democracy.
is there voting by the majority on the workplace? is there equal representation for workers and owners and share holders at meeting? do workers have freedom of speech without fear of retaliation and are protected by law? are workers and owners treated equally in courts?
are the rights to food, housing, jobs, education equally enforced for all? ha, do such rights exist in a meaningful fashion?
democracy in the US, which is highly questionable if we use anything but current structures and practices as our standard for judging democracy, is minimal at best.
as stated by others, you cannot have political democracy without first having economic democracy.
as is the norm for such threads, terms are tossed about with no real thought or analysis of the definition or origins.