While I agree wholeheartedly with the views expressed here, I have a couple of quibbles:

We talk a lot about "democracy", but in most situations, the "winner" does not represent the views of the majority, so in today's world we see far more of a plurocracy than we do a true "democracy". For instance, a recent election in New Orleans chose a local judge. The election day was the Saturday before Mardi Gras and the turnout was 6.1%, from which two of six who got the "largest amount of votes" were chosen for a runoff. The runoff election one month later garnered 9.6% turnout, with the winner collecting 54% of those votes counted. So 5.18% of the registered voters actually chose the new judge, and of course that doesn't even consider those who didn't register to vote or aren't eligible to register to vote. Rule by the "majority"? Hardly. I'd actually welcome direct rule by the majority in that, say for national elections, 167 million people would have to choose the winner. I'd welcome that true democracy because of course, nothing would ever gain that type of majority of votes and the government would be rendered wholly ineffective.

Also, while I agree with the idea that democracy and freedom are two totally different ideas, and in fact that those ideas are more of an antithesis to each other than synonym, it is interesting to hear Biden's speeches nowdays. Count the number of times that he uses the word "freedom". "Democracy" (which is inherently false anyway as shown above) is sprinkled liberally throughout every speech, but "freedom" is almost never spoken. Wonder why that is? :)