For example, the polities of Scandinavia and Holland are significantly more democratic than is that of the United States, which is very far from being democratic. But of course, the Founding Fathers who wrote and ratified the US Constitution designed the government so that it would NOT be democratic, and they were quite successful in doing so. At the same time, some of the states and cities of the US have somewhat more democratic structures than does the US per se, but the political powers of the US federal government are so much more important and pervasive than are those of the states or municipalities that the overall consequence of governance in the US is that it is non-democratic. The assigned theme of this talk is participation, which is the biggest single indicator of democracy, in my opinion. One can be denied the opportunity to participate when she wants to, or forced to participate when she doesn't.
Participation usually involves some form of activity.
People are becoming fed up with the sham of current political structures and are refusing to participate, even though they often voice their refusal in terms of dislike of politicians or policies, rather than in terms of the inadequacies of the available modes of participation, so blinded are they by the myth of democracy. Though bullshit walks, money talks. Money is far more important than votes. It is clearly and everywhere far more effective to buy a politician than to vote for one. Much is heard these days about the role of television in political discourse, participation, and policy making.