[jasode]

>"democratization" doesn't mean more people have access to it.

> I just don't like it and think it is relatively new usage and a change in the older meaning of the word.

People have been using "democratize" to describe "more accessible to the masses" for a long time. Here's an example from 106 years ago in 1920 :

https://www.google.com/books/edition/Soviet_Russia/qflaAAAAM...

And 40 years ago a 1986 article of "microchip democratizing computing" : https://www.google.com/books/edition/Procom_s_1986_1987_Dent...

The additional meanings of democratize to describe "more accessible" are also documented in Oxford and Merriam-Webster dictionaries:

https://www.encyclopedia.com/humanities/dictionaries-thesaur...

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democratic#:~:tex...

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

It could be that HN commnter replying to submission about education in the United States indicating that he is "irked" by the term "democratisation" is not located within the United States but rather in a non-English speaking country not initiallu founded upon "democratic" principles (cf. United States) and with a dissimilar history of "democracy". As such, his interpetation of this term could have different meaning to him than the journalist working for The Atlantic who resides within the United States and is employed by one of its academic institutions

[ben_w]

Indeed. Like ks2048 I find the use of "democratize" outisde of governance to be bizzare and even annoying.

I am British by birth, and IIRC Hacker News is pretty much the only place I see "democratize" used to mean "make more widely available".

[1vuio0pswjnm7]

*initially

[potsandpans]

Right. But it's not my favorite nerd snipe interpretation that allows me to post low effort comments on hackernews about the headline instead of engaging in a meaningful discussion about the article.