Yes, your skepticism is well established, and I would like to reference this short video:

* Astra Taylor asks Philosopher Cornel West on Real Democracy!
https://youtu.be/aYVtmx6vSfQ

But I would like to think that going against the flow and adopting democracy has similarities to moving away from proprietary to free software!

Another way of putting it is the word 'empowerment'.   Free Software, Democracy, and I would add others like Education and Human Rights, all empower the individuals so they can authorize themselves to do what they need to do and not seek for anyone's permission.

Sorry need to go to sleep soon but thank you for your many good points and let's keep talking!

-Yasu

PS
I recently did volunteer  Japanese CC translation of:

Capitalism Will End. What Is A Better System? - Economic Update with Richard Wolff
https://youtu.be/OfOI9TlZ8_U

> On Apr 26, 2022, at 19:41, Jean Louis <bugs@gnu.support> wrote:
> 
> * Yasuaki Kudo <yasu@yasuaki.com> [2022-04-25 12:59]:
>> So I have been thinking for a long time how to change the tide and
>> make the workplace democracy (one worker one vote and zero
>> shareholder votes, or worker cooperatives) more of the norm rather
>> than exception, as well as how to start one 😅
> 
> It sounds you think democracy is solution to group management.
> 
> For management of anything one need management skills. Those are
> various, could be analytical skills, implementation skills,
> relationships, and many other issues.
> 
> The knowledge and practical competency for management does not stem
> from simple membership in a group.
> 
> Thus it is impossible that all the members in the group have
> analytical skills to decide on how and what to do in that group.
> 
> Before deciding about democracy for the group you better review why at
> all did you decide that democracy is good for any group?
> 
> Do you think there was EVER democracy in this world? There was never,
> not even in the ancient Greece, where they have included only
> "citizens" and not those living in the city, but citizens were
> qualified by different criteria. Additionally, they did not include
> women. 
> 
> Democracy was never. It is not today, it will never be.
> 
> Let us not live in delusions.
> 
> The term "democracy" is used by various oppressive powers to blame
> other countries and gain control over them. Like the USA for example.
> 
> One worker -- one vote -- simply does not work and will never work
> well. It is the best way to ruin every organization. It will lead to
> corruption. 
> 
> People are not equal. Their skills and education are not equal. Thus
> not every worker can know about management and decisions that are
> optimum for survival of the group.
> 
> If that would be so, then people would not attend financial courses to
> become qualified to deal with money.
> 
> Management is everything. Even a cleaner is manager, managing
> resources for cleaning of the building, and managing dirt.
> 
> We all manage something. And highest managers are highest
> servants. They have to serve all the people under them with resources,
> education, guidance, so that organization performs well.
> 
> Let us put aside those common viewpoints how managers are "bosses" and
> those under them need to listen to their advices and orders, even if
> bad. That is wrong viewpoint and wrong setup.
> 
> All people in one organization serve each other. Managers who are good
> will be most efficient and serving most people at once.
> 
> Now back to management issues as related to democracy: I don't think
> democracy is the goal and that it should be kept as ultimate
> principle.
> 
> Imagine a group of farmers who are supposed to bring best decisions
> how to divide the moneys from cooperative association. 
> 
> Now majority of those farmers, who are frankly stupid for management
> purposes, could say, let us have that money that we buy for each of us
> cow, and we will have our milk and we will be happy, this way each of
> us benefits. Maybe this could be majority like 90% of them.
> 
> And maybe 10% of them would say that it is better to purchase tractor
> so that each of farmers can faster farm and get more food. This would
> be more beneficial and more worth than just a cow.
> 
> Now let the stupid majority decide it for everybody and destroy their
> group endeavors on long term.
> 
> And that is democracy.
> 
> Don't you see that the world of democracy is not functioning?
> 
>> In that vein, I thought about the sort of market in which workplace
>> democracy really has the natural competitive advantage, rather than
>> just having nicer administration and relationships among the
>> workers?
> 
> It is illusion.
> 
> But what you could do -- you could mix meritocracy with democracy.
> 
> 1. Make an articles of organization so that people must have completed
>   specific skills in order to be in the specific group within larger
>   group. For example, group of farmers digging cannot be same group
>   as farmers controlling tractor as later have skills how to drive
>   tractor. 
> 
> 2. Enable democracy within a group, as people who have equal skills
>   and education, may better analyze what is best decision as related
>   to their subject.
> 
>> * Lower the cost of maintenance by relying as much as possible on
>> * 'free lunch' provided the by the free software.
> 
> I can't understand above. I do not see anything economically viable.
> 
>> The worker cooperatives, with its democratic cultures will fit
>> naturally to the Free Software community and they can help closed
> 
> I don't think so.
> 
> Free Software Philosophy is not and was not democratic decision. Haven
> thanks it was not. 
> 
> Democratic opinions are also not guided by people, but by individuals
> paying for opinions to intrude into minds of people. Thus anything
> democratic is most probably not democratic.
> 
> Democratic culture does not exist in free software community. I do not
> see it as necessary.
> 
> Let me give you example: on this mailing list we have a moderator. I
> do not think moderator is really skilled, but I trust moderator with
> good intentions and I don't take it so bad when moderator, according
> to my opinion, does few mistakes. However -- that is not
> democratically elected moderator. Did you as member of the mailing
> list elect that moderator? No? So where is democracy?
> 
> Linux kernel was not managed democratically, but we can say socially
> and by contributions are accepted rather by meritocracy, than
> democracy. 
> 
> And all software projects have their leaders. Leaders usually started
> the project. You join if you wish, but you can't do mostly nothing if
> you wish to change project to something else what leaders don't
> want. They may listen to you, maybe not. But people can't change
> decisions of software project leaders if they are majority.
> 
> Some groups may decide to use democracy, but really it is not common
> in free software.
> 
> Just because some term like "democracy" is often promoted on TV, it
> does not mean it has its validity in all areas of life. It does not.
> 
> Like they say on this Princeton University's page, democracy is one of
> most cherished ideas...
> 
> Against Democracy | Princeton University Press
> https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691162607/against-democracy
> 
> 10 Reasons Why Democracy Doesn’t Work - Listverse
> https://listverse.com/2013/06/16/10-reasons-why-democracy-doesnt-work/
> 
>> To be more concrete, say a bank has proprietary risk evaluation
>> systems that cost a lot of money for them to maintain.   What part
>> of the system do they really want to maintain and what part of is
>> just commodity trucking of information (ETL) that they only regard
>> as cost of doing business.   Can we break it up into pieces of Free
>> Software and reduce the problem into the integration of the software
>> as the enterprises see fit?
> 
> That is definitely good idea, but it wasn't democratically invented.
> 
> Jean
> 
> Take action in Free Software Foundation campaigns:
> https://www.fsf.org/campaigns
> 
> In support of Richard M. Stallman
> https://stallmansupport.org/