No dude, party members in the Eastern Europe's communists countries also voted. Our dictators called our stalinism a democracy.
The essence of democracy is the rule of law and the individual freedoms of the citizens, which makes it possible for citizens to participate, the vote being a means to an end and not being possible without the rule of law and without those freedoms.
And I'm not assuming too much here, but within this context, my opinion is that if you haven't lived under some form of dictatorship, you don't know what you're talking about.
Late Latin from Greek dēmokratia, from dēmos ‘the people’ + -kratia ‘power, rule.’
I don't know of any mechanism other than voting for gleaning the popular will.
> my opinion is that if you haven't lived under some form of dictatorship, you don't know what you're talking about.
I cam't agree with that. Your experiences make you special, as do mine me. But if you really believe what you wrote, no further discourse from you can enlighten me or others until we too have lived under despotism.
Sortition (choosing public officials randomly) is one possibility.
Being a shareholder means you have volunteered part of your personal treasure to be part of an on going enterprise in the hopes of earning more treasure.
In the modern world, native citizens put nothing up for their vote. Taxes are not voluntary, nor are they required for a vote.
> Also, people get too fixated on the right to vote. That's not what defines a democracy,
That is simply, plainly wrong. Words don't change to mean what you want them to mean. The essence of democracy, that which literally defines it, is voting.
>Well, big companies have multiple owners, so one owner cannot do what he wants unless he has a majority. Also a company is subject to market forces, customers voting with their wallet. So really, an owner can only do what he wants for as long as (1) he can afford it and (2) his peers tolerate it.
Your thinking is very muddy.