The question with continued nudging is perhaps not which individual nudge pushes one off the cliff, but what can be done to recognize the harm in such nudging,

The question with continued nudging is perhaps not which individual nudge pushes one off the cliff, but what can be done to recognize the harm in such nudging, in not addressing it timely and sufficiently, and bolstering against it. For instance, in the US super-majorities are not required for many significant and fundamental changes. This can be easily used to advertise it as democratic, while in practice, as some countries in Europe can demonstrate, is actually a danger. There are certain things that cannot be up for discussion in democracies, or else they become easy targets for their abolition or severe containment. Recognizing this apparent contradiction is key to the survival of democracy. Scholar much smarter than I have laid this out, so I won't attempt it, but it seems to me that the discussion of how to keep democracy guaranteed and healthy is too absent.