On Morality of Democracy

Democracy holds insofar a moral value as it frames the individuals' and corporations' self-interestedness related and relativized to the interests of the others, inclusively to the interests of minorities(!!).
Consequently, power has in a democratic system a purpose that is different from the goals which power has in non-democratic systems. Democratic power is committed to accomplish a coordination of interests under the principle of equal opportunities. Power which serves certain interests only, cannot be considered to be democratically legitimated, and deserves massive resistance.

No people nor nation can reasonably arrogate to oneself to be a "chosen" people or nation. For this reason, the morality of democracy cannot be defined merely intranational. The peoples' and nations' self-interestedness should be viewed related and relativized to the interests of the other peoples and nations, inclusively to the interests of minorities(!!).

Without embedding (and relativizing!) the national interests in a global, cosmopolitical partnership, a nation's pride to be democratic would be lies and deception, and its efforts to "spread democracy" would be nothing else but shameless hegemonism. And hegemonism is morally reprehensible; it deserves massive resistance.

In this ethic sense, the Roman Republic and the U.S. expansion à la Manifest Destiny were just as little democratic as the revived Manchester Capitalism was and is. They deserved and deserve: resistance.