Zakaria goes on to say that, "The Bill of Rights, after all, is a list of things that the government may not do, regardless of the wishes of the majority. Of America's three branches of government, The Supreme Court is headed by nine unelected men and women with life tenure." Zakaria has a point that the men and women in charge of one of America's highest offices must be elected. It is too much to expect the elected representatives to handle offices of the land that count among the best not only in the United States but among the best in the world. At least the election process of these gentlemen and ladies in the United States' Supreme Court must be more broad based that what it is today.
Fareed Zakaria quotes specific instances and relates them to the illiberal way they are handled in democratic setup. His favorite democratic setups are the United States and Western Europe. His arguments have their due weight. Too much democracy becomes a punishment rather than a remedy. If democracy has to operate in a liberal environment, then it must per se allow its populace the maximum liberty which also provides security and choice.
But Zakaria has said that "the tension between constitutional liberalism and democracy centers on the scope of governmental authority. Constitutional liberalism is about the limitation of power, democracy is about its accumulation and use." The contradiction is clear. Just like there is no such thing like a free lunch, there is such an issue begging notice that democracy is not the glittering gold that it is being offered as. Even in times of election the party offering maximum benefits quite often wins the show. The process of democracy is a tragedy being played out day in and out, and nobody is there to attempt to correct, modify or stop the show. If the process of democracy cannot work in places like Pakistan and Afghanistan, it is a telling commentary about the frailty of democracy as a system (US, UK express concern over terror safe haven in Pak, Afghanistan).
Zakaria may not have offered feasible remedies to the malaise. However, he has pointed out anomalies that exist in the most democratic societies in the world. What's more He has pointed out that ironically democracy exists because of these anomalies.
Evidence to support my argument
First of all, let me make it clear I am not making common cause with Fareed Zakaria. I wish democracy all the best and hope it prospers wherever it exists. But just take a look at what is happening in some of the best democratic countries in the world. Let us take a look at the United States. President Obama and Vice President Biden have the issues of combating employment discrimination, expand hate crimes statutes, end deceptive voting practices, end racial profiling, reduce crime recidivism by providing ex-offender support, eliminate sentencing disparities, and expand use of drug courts (Civil Rights).
I do not wish to denigrate the United States.