@jeffcliff @FBICatgirl idk how canada does, but in US the people who have the most intimate knowledge of the pointy end of the law are no longer eligible to try to change it. So 'empowered to remove your vote' is already covered.
Seriously tho, the number of boomercons complaining about how complicated ranked choice voting is after it was passed in Alaska; sheesh! If you can't figure that out, what on earth makes you feel qualified to weigh in on actual policy questions?
"1 person 1 vote" is some real *equity* nonsense to begin with. How about 1 vote for every dollar you pay in taxes? Or votes for landowners wasn't all bad; invest in *the country* if you want a say in how it's run 🤷♀️ surely some kind of limiting principle would be preferable.
Argument for universal suffrage is self-contradictory anyway:
"we can't let these idiot plebs just do what they want, we need wise leaders to put them in cages or shoot them for breaking incomprehensibly wise and righteous rules!"
"ok, who will choose the wise leaders? Some kind of scholastic olympics competition to objectivity find the wisest people in all the land?"
"nah, let the idiot plebs choose based on who lies to them most outlandishly, they're too stupid to make any other decisions, but absolutely smart enough to make *that* decision, obviously."
If you trust the plebs, no government is needed, and if you don't, then democracy is insufficient to protect you from them.