[jsisto]

We don't need a "new theory of democracy" - we need to actually follow the Constitution we already have.

The author's concerns about majority rule leading to bad outcomes? That's exactly why the founders created a constitutional republic, not a pure democracy. They knew about mob rule and designed safeguards against it.

The Constitution already handles these problems:

Contradictory voting patterns: Federalism lets states make their own choices. If Kentucky votes against Medicaid expansion, that's their call - other states can do differently and we can all see what works.

Demagogues: Separation of powers stops any president from becoming a dictator. Congress controls spending, courts check unconstitutional acts, and the First Amendment protects counter-speech.

Protecting rights: The Bill of Rights and 14th Amendment protect individuals even when majorities disagree.

Rather than throwing out 250 years of constitutional law, maybe we should just enforce what we have? The framework works when we actually use it. The real problem isn't that democracy has "failed" - it's that we've stopped following our own rules.

[lunar-whitey]

The United States Constitution is a relic that predates national political parties as a concept. Political parties effectively neutralize many of its structural checks, including federalism.

The framers recognized this failure in their own lifetimes and held to gentleman’s agreements to limit the power of parties while openly anticipating that the system they created would be replaced. The erosion of their informal understanding has taken far longer than expected, but it has certainly occurred. Today, the political consensus that could allow for the creation of a viable replacement no longer exists. History shows whatever follows from this is often very unpleasant.

[jfengel]

The Constitution has no protection against gerrymandering.

The Constitution has no protection against the capture of the Supreme Court.

The Constitution was designed with so many checks and balances that they interfere with each other. The Congress has long been incapable of any significant action, and even if it weren't controlled by the President's party it would still not be capable of significantly preventing abuses by the executive branch.

[jaybrendansmith]

And when you say 'We', you mean explicitly the current MAGA, the President and including also the entire Republican congress and the Supreme Court. We are in the midst of a hostile takeover of our government, and of course we blame the Constitution. I didn't have this on my bingo card, and I think most of us, relatively comfortable and wealthy, don't have the stomach for what needs to happen next. They have taken self-rule government away from the people, and they are not gonna to just give it back.