:
|
I think your thoughts are still a bit muddled.
" i'm saying democracy should work in the interests of the most people possible"
^ yes so when 1% means a few million people then this IS the case. If 6/10 people want X then how it is far to say that you can't have X due to 4/10 not wanting it? That by definition is not a democracy.
Otherwise really what is the point? A majority vote for something but they can't have it because its "not majority enough"? Makes no sense.
|
/delurks
1.7% in this instance does not mean a few million people, it means 1,089,700. This majority has imposed its will upon 30,960,300 people. the Greeks--the founders of democracy--understood the tyranny of the majority rule and took steps to make sure laws passed with a 67% majority. I.e. they weren't daft.
We do not live in a direct democracy. We live in a representative democracy. Decisions are made in parliament precisely to avoid the potential of a Kestrel swilling, Sun reading racist having a direct say upon issues that effect millions.
This referendum did not give a mandate to activate Article 50, it did not show that Britain is overwhelmingly in favour of leaving the EU. It showed the country is divided almost exactly in half over the issue.
Or as I would more scathingly suggest, it shows one half of the population is scared of brown people more than the other half.