A modernized form of democracy should be the goal of every society

I wish that he does well in this debate, however not well enough to beat me. (humor) However, it would be a pleasure to debate you in this subject and I hope we can both remain polite towards each other through it. [Affirmation of inherent rights] Additionally I grant you the right to make arguments in future arguments otherwise there would be no debate and you would simply forfeit the next two rounds. However I do deny that you even have a right to reserve that allows you to add/subtract/change pieces from your resolution. Now to proceed with this debate. My opponent (who has the burden of proof) gives an excellent and rather detailed and lengthy description of his resolution. In my opinion he does a very fine job of it. Essentially it boils down to the following: [Summary and minor critiquing] 1. Every society in current existance should strive to become a modernized government. Now my opponent attempts to define modernized democracy not by what it is, but rather by how society's view democracy. Which for the American citizen may differ completely from the definition of a Chinese citizen. Essentially, my opponent fails to define what he means by "modernized democracy" except for a very frail image of a democratic republic at which the United States now operates under. 2. My opponent then attempts but in my opinion fails to make a very false assumption that "people tend to vote for people who make them happy". Rather it is only me personally that finds this assumption false or many others I will leave up to the voters to decide. However when I vote, I vote because my views align with the candidate I am casting my ballot for. Not because "they make me happy". 3. He then goes onto contend that democracy incites less wars than do or could any other form of government based off an essay for proof. [Responses, Rebuttals, Yada yada] Since my opponent has made this debate about a moral obligation rather than rather a form of government and I quote "is possible of if it would work". This minor clause then forces me to raise the question of: >>>>Why should not every society seek a utopian form of government where every citizen is educated and has the best of the country in mind? Where not one citizen steals? Where every decision is held for a week long debate with the entirety of the country involved? Wouldn't that utopian form of government cause less wars than a democracy? <<<< Also one would question if democracy inherently does run through "the consent of the governed, or will of the people" after viewing many public opinion polls. The main reason why every society (especially societies where everyone is educated and has the ability to vote) should not strive for a democracy is simply because there are thousands of different issues. It is practically impossible that the majority of a society agrees with the persons governing the society as there are thousands of issues and so few candidates. Example: There are 1000 issues on the ballot. 4 people are running for office. It is quite impossible for the person elected to agree with over 50% of society's views. Person number 1 matches Voter A's opinions on issues by 40% Person number 2 matches Voter A's opinions on issues by 20% Person number 3 matches Voter A's opinions on issues by 4% Person number 4 matches Voter A's opinions on issues by 44% Voter A is hopefully going to vote for Person number 4. However as you can see the majority of person A's opinions are not being matched by the person now governing. Therefore democracy essentially does not represent the "will" of the people. This isn't even taking into account those who don't vote, are misinformed, don't understand the issues, etc. Since there are many issues, few people running, and a diverse group of people in society it is almost impossible that a democratic republic better voices society's "will" than that of other governments. I would like to thank my opponent for this debate and look forward to the second round. Also no rudeness towards my opponent was intended, I am merely debating.