[aeternum]

A core tenet of Truecrypt + Veracrypt (developer guarantee) has always been no backdoors, even if requested by government.

If in a democratic society, the majority agrees that government should have backdoors (with the correct oversight). Then it follows that Veracrypt should be illegal as its use is not in alignment with the will of the majority.

I personally don't agree with the majority here but can you fault the logic?

[nostrademons]

Most forms of democracy do not have a direct correspondence between "the will of the people" and the actual policies enacted. As another poster mentioned, tyranny of the majority is a thing, and robust democracies have evolved institutions to deal with it. Otherwise there's nothing stopping the majority from periodically voting the minority off the island, Survivor style, until only a single dictator remains.

In the U.S. in particular, there's strong respect for individual rights enshrined in the Constitution, and a key role of the judicial branch is ensuring that those rights are respected regardless of what the majority thinks. The majority cannot enslave the minority, for example, regardless of what the legislature votes. Nor can it deprive it of speech or free assembly, or guns, or a right to trial by jury.

[cacophony1977]

It's pretty hilarious to me that you think the Constitution is anything more than a piece of paper. Or that the judicial branch cannot be co-opted. It's not magic champ. It's maintained by consensus.

[aeternum]

Ah so the iron law of oligarchy becomes our salvation

if only it were so simple

[MegagramEnjoyer]

That's why specialized agencies exist within the government body: FCC, FDA, etc.

aka leave it to the experts because the majority isn't qualified to make such decisions.