[mdp2021]

Iterative elections of electors (e.g. Venice); ranked voting (e.g. Australia); ostracism (e.g. Athens); group voting (e.g. Rome); weighed voting (e.g. corporations); disapproval voting (e.g. Soviet Union)...

Majorities may be used technically but it is not the majority of the population that determines the policy (which remains indirect anyway).

[kennysoona]

> Majorities may be used technically but it is not the majority of the population that determines the policy (which remains indirect anyway).

They can still always overrule it though. That's inescapable in a democracy.

[mdp2021]

How?

[kennysoona]

Referendum or voting in their representatives. As an example, assume 80% want to introduce racial segregation in each of the UK, Australia, the US and Canada. What measures would stop them?

[mdp2021]

For example, the potential election of candidates within a subset that escapes that 80%, as enabled by systems similar to those listed, which have exactly the purpose of approximating optimal choice.

[kennysoona]

None of the systems you listed will protect against an 80% majority wanting to force through specific legislation. Through brute force they will get their way eventually and inevitably.

If you disagree, I hope you can give a more fleshed out example than, what seems to be, to be the vague handwaving you have been doing so far - no offense intended.

[mdp2021]

> None of the systems you listed will protect against an 80% majority wanting to force through specific legislation

Close to impossible to say without consideration of specific implementations of the exemplary sub-frameworks proposed.

> a more fleshed out example

A John Rawls like framework of common best interest in not appointing beasts, coupled with criteria to discriminate beasts? The point is not about providing a detailed solution here, but in pointing in a direction beyond simple, lacking forms of democracy, suboptimal in theory and in results. If you have naïve processes in place, faults will eventually show: the system must become resistant. A large number of possible improvements can be considered: the point remains that they must be studied - this has never been the "end of history", if only because in too many systems the fool and the bright have similar impact.

And I need to say: like in all systems, checking what went wrong, why it went wrong, and implementing solutions so that it will not go wrong again.