Their is no "supposed to" in Bitcoin. Its an experiment that went totally insane. It does not have any way of finding agreement that ankered within the blockchain. The potential value that could be destroyed is so big that it compels people to find some kind of agreemnt.

Newer blockchains are already learning from these problems and are innovating. Bitshares for example has the goverment structure built in, most of the paramaters can be chainged by voting.

Now that does not make it democracy as we know it, because the power of the vote is based on how much stack you have. Its essentially a company with stack holders.

Doing a democracy as we have it in real live will be hard because of the identity problem.

Bitcoin need some way to resolve these conflicts and if possible root the choices in the blockchain itself.

This issue really forces you to think about how we make choices in groupes, and what is "fair".

Their is a lot of research on this in political economics. James Buchanen had interesting things to say about the Economic of Club and the Economics of Constitution.

I also recommend,"Choosing in Groups: Analytical Politics Revisited"