Some major flaws in the argument presented here: When America talks about spreading democracy, that is just a euphemism for capitalism. The US fought North Korea in the Korean War and later North Vietnam in the Vietnam war. However both wars were primarily about preserving capitalist systems not democracy. South Korea did not become a a democracy until the 1980s.

Indie you are judging the merits of Democracy based on false American advertisement. That is like concluding democracy is a bad thing because the DDR called itself democratic. It was just false advertisement.

This kind of writing is just propping up the anti-democracy propaganda pushed out from places like China and Russia.

I totally agree that our current representational democracies could be reformed. However it is not like those who object to Western style democracy currently have anything better to offer. Chines objection is nothing but an attempt at excusing their own oppression and you are acting like their errand boy, no offense. The precise examples from Greek democracy you used here has already been pushed by their propaganda to attempt to muddy the waters.

The problem is that you try to judge the merits of western democracy by using the US as the only yardstick. As if America represents all these is to say about Western democracy.

How many countries did Switzerland invade the last 100 years? Zero. Yet out of dozens of Western democracies you cherry pick the biggest bully, America, and let this complete outlier of a country represent all of us.

And there are no white empires any more than there are brown, black or yellow empires. Imagine changing history books to talk about the Persian empire as a brown empire or China as a yellow empire? The Aztecs as a red empire. It is an inherently racist way to look at the world.