> Rome once had a democracy sort of right? Not really. The Roman Republic had legislative assemblies and elected magistrates, but the deck was firmly stacked

> Rome once had a democracy sort of right? Not really. The Roman Republic had legislative assemblies and elected magistrates, but the deck was firmly stacked in favor of the aristocracy. Votes in the Centuriate assembly, which elected all senior magistrates, were heavily weighted by wealth. Originally the highest two classes, comprising those with at least 10,000 denarii in assets, controlled an outright majority of the votes. (1 denarius is on the order of 1 day's income for an unskilled laborer). The weighting was somewhat reduced in the mid 3rd century, but Sulla's reforms around 80 BC reverted the change, and additionally stripped the more democratic plebeian and tribal assemblies of most of their powers. The senate (ostensibly an advisory body, but by the middle republic actually a legislature) was never elected. During the early republic, senators were appointed by the consuls. Later, they were appointed either by the censors, or automatically upon election to a senior magistracy. In either case, appointment to the senate was for life.