It depends on the form of democracy. The word "democracy" is used a lot. Usually people aren't mindful of what an arbitrary term like democracy represents in c

It depends on the form of democracy. The word "democracy" is used a lot. Usually people aren't mindful of what an arbitrary term like democracy represents in context. They have static perception. Unfortunately, due to the way a lot of these subjects are taught, most people seem to grow up believing that [governmental change in support of human freedom/justice] has reached its climax, that the end-all-be-all form of it has effectively been reached. People then fail to care about seeking even the simplest of changes to the system itself. They stay mentally contained to a philosophical box. The US federal system as it now stands in loose terms, for instance, is a centralized, binary, non-preferential democratic republic. Paired with its form of taxation, this system has resulted in one of the most top-heavy, enriched, powerful, imprisoning, corporate oligarchical-like governments the world has known. Wars of luxury start happening with relative ease, just as they did under more totalitarianism and deluded republics. The feeding frenzy has never been better. As long as its "citizenry" is lulled into believing in an "enemy" and doesn't have to feel the weight of its violent force that affects others, this will continue. They'll keep throwing their own freedom and that of their neighbor down the drain in support of revenge, clinging to the hopes of another election. One of the only ways to conscientiously object peacefully is the withdrawal of funding, opting for social NGOs instead. Even that is a colossal task. A simple nonviolent action against the status quo of taxation may land a person caged. Neomonarchism: Neomonarchism as a reaction to a growing [corporate-war-prison-surveillance state (sprinkled with democracy)] doesn't make much logical sense. I doubt most neomonarchists want more freedom. Anyone who wants more freedom and liberation should tread in the other direction: away from these extremely centralized, top-heavy systems of today and yesteryear. To empower individuals more is to effectively disempower the ability of individuals and groups to rule over one another (who rule at the hand of a sword or by laws inherently backed by violence).