> addressing that wrong

How does one do that? You can't un-enslave, or un-intern, or un-commit atrocities, so your best bet is some >subjective< analog of recompense.

Then who is to decide what is satisfactory compensation? You? Me? Voters? The government? Universities?

> Voters? The government?

Yep, those two.

Democracy is the worst of all forms of government, except for all the rest.

So by your quote I'm to assume either you're a monarchist seeking a benevolent ruler, a socialist/communist, or an anarchist.

No?

I can point out an insightful quote as a warning and imply we’re not on a healthy path in our current system without espousing delusions of socialism…

The democracy in the United States has gone on to outlive him by 210 years and has had a social security program for 88 of those years.

His prediction was 300 years. Anyway I don't think it's until recently where we've really started voting ourselves money straight from the treasury. Time will tell whether that's sustainable.

We've always voted money straight from the Treasury. Government contracts, government subsidies, you name it, it's been from Day 1. Every tax break we give is money that the Treasury could spend. Every "incentive" we provide is the same. The Whiskey Rebellion was Treasury money...

We decide as a country, the same way we decide that billionaires "deserve" large tax breaks. The way we decide to spend more on defense than our top 3 competitors combined. The way we decide to sell grazing, mineral, oil and gas rights for pennies on the dollar to companies seeking to "profit" off the natural resources of our country.

We elect representatives in Congress and the WH, who based on public opinion in the form of voters decide.