> I also propose to you that voting is not the same thing at all as having a choice. For example, every election in my state has tax increases on the ballot. They always pass. What happened to my choice? I have to pay the increased taxes, whether I voted or not, whether I voted yea or nay, whether I want to or not.

You have a choice and other people in your state have equal choices (maybe me!), and of course not 100% will agree, and so democracy respects all those choices. Democracy, in a sense, is a respect for other people's opinions and choices.

I'm not pretending there is no compulsion at all, or that sometimes things that could be or should be voluntary are made universal through law. And then so few inform themselves, and there is so much mis- and disinformation, and so few vote. So yeah, it's a mess. It's a messy human system, and so is every other system: As I think you are a veteran of IT systems, I'm sure you know that even our logic machines are fundamentally messy and human.

But volunteering, which I've done plenty of, isn't so ideal either. Some things I do voluntarily are necessary and should be universal, and my neighbors sit home and leave the work to me. (I'm not crying, just observing dynamics of it.) Some parties make the 'voluntary' compulsory through very undemocratic pressure, and a democratic system would be better. Volunteer structures often omit the input of people who are affected by the situation but lack time, money, status, etc. - people who would have a say if done democratically. Sometimes that's done intentionally, so powerful parties can run over the vulnerable. 'Voluntary' can mean 'extra-legal'. Some parties 'volunteer' for their own good to avoid meeting obligations to the group - e.g., wealthy parties fund 'business district' quasi-governmental services and then rage when asked to contribute to the collective good, like schools or cleaning other neighborhoods. In some places, wealthy parties directly fund police equipment - it's not a compulsory tax, but probably a very bad idea. In an Apple Store in one city I noticed a uniformed city police officer acting like a security guard; I inquiried politely and they said Apple paid the city directly for their services. Democracy has a lot of built-in equity.

My main point is that democratic government is one way (not the only way) we voluntarily (though not always voluntarily) organize ourselves. Self-government is another term used for democracy - how could we manage without a king or some superior governing us and compelling us? It turns out, we could get together and cooperate, and function better than a king - a pretty optimistic development after 10,000 years of civilization. Democratic government is not some pernicious special case, compelling us under its yoke, though like any tool it has advantages and disadvantages we should consider (including the compulsory parts).

> To put it more simply, a democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner (that's why we have a Bill of Rights, btw).

That is one of my favorite ways to express what I think is a fundamental concept about human rights and mob rule, and so I agree completely.

> I see again the idea that for people to cooperate, compulsion must be used.

I wrote also about volunteerism.