From the post I was replying to, and the post of yours that preceded it in this thread, I take it that you consider democracy in the USA and UK to be less resil

From the post I was replying to, and the post of yours that preceded it in this thread, I take it that you consider democracy in the USA and UK to be less resilient than in Germany and Austria, and you attribute this to the latter pairs' defensive democracy. The Wikipedia article you linked to, however, claims that the US uses defensive democratic tactics frequently. I'm not saying this implies the US has a resilient democracy - I'm not sure about the link between defensive democracy and resilience, and I am not sure this claim about the US can be justified in the first place - but if this claim were true, it would appear to contradict what I take to be your thesis, as outlined in my first paragraph here. I my second paragraph, I am making the claim that there is a paradox in how the the defense of democracy can, and quite often has been, used to justify acts that do no such thing. In the US, since the 2020 elections, various states have amended voting laws, allegedly to defend democracy against electoral fraud, even though there is no evidence for any threat justifying these particular defensive measures, despite a great deal of effort being expanded in trying to find any.