I'm not sure how to put this in a way that won't sound offensive. Please cut me some slack in that regard, because I'm honestly not trying to be offensive. I th

I'm not sure how to put this in a way that won't sound offensive. Please cut me some slack in that regard, because I'm honestly not trying to be offensive. I think your description of this is naive in a very serious way. Here the "marketing" is a big part of the point. Proposing solutions to democratic problems with something derived from economics provides theoretical cover to people who are seeking to undermine democracy in service of capital. The idea that democracy needs to be "more effective" because of some structural issue, not with society but with democracy itself, is incredibly dangerous. EDIT: I'm rambling, but I think that the article was a type of propaganda. I was also trying to point out that the constitution enshrines some very extreme positions for at least one minority that actually benefits from things like what are described by this article. I don't take it's claims seriously because I believe that it actually exists to present aspects of capitalism as superior to democracy.