> A well-functioning democracy, with a high level of participation and engagement, of subsidiarity, a free and diverse press?
A well-regulated democracy isn't a good thing inherently. People can be awful and oppressive and this is why founding fathers rejected the idea of a democracy for US. We needed to put a republic with heavy constraints on the power of the govt precisely for that reason.
A great example of well regulated democracy which is terrible is India, because its founding fathers failed to control the power an average voter has, in India you can file a Public Interest Litigation [1] to the courts and get cryptocurrencies banned (without going through the legislative body).
Compared that to say Lee Kuan Yew. Not free press (can't criticize Lee Kuan Yew, protest freely, or strike freely), but you'll see Singapore work way better than say India.
A well-regulated democracy isn't a good thing inherently. People can be awful and oppressive and this is why founding fathers rejected the idea of a democracy for US. We needed to put a republic with heavy constraints on the power of the govt precisely for that reason.
A great example of well regulated democracy which is terrible is India, because its founding fathers failed to control the power an average voter has, in India you can file a Public Interest Litigation [1] to the courts and get cryptocurrencies banned (without going through the legislative body).
Compared that to say Lee Kuan Yew. Not free press (can't criticize Lee Kuan Yew, protest freely, or strike freely), but you'll see Singapore work way better than say India.
1. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_interest_litigation_in_...