Does alexis de tocqueville’s argument about the tyranny of the majority reflect american democracy today? provide examples to support your answer.

Explanation:

First of all, you have to ask yourself if there is such a thing as a democracy anywhere today. If you cannot provide a resounding "yes", then the question really has no meaning.

Furthermore if there isn't a democracy, how are people governed?

It must be by a very powerful minority. The opposite is true: we do not have a tyranny of the majority. We have a tyranny of the minority.  The best way to fight any tyranny is in it's beginning stages. Show it to be the sham that it is. But it takes an educated and dedicated people the know how to attack a government. Knowledge is your very best weapon in the beginning.

Later on it is too late.  Caesar made himself popular with the mob, not by promising them health care. He found a far cheaper way. He gave them the games. They were indebted to him, or so they thought. So a few controlled murders and the sacrifice of some otherwise not notable lives and he was a hero among the people. Slowly but surely the republic (the closest thing Rome had to a democracy) eroded and in it's place, first the three (Crassius, Pompey and Caesar effectively controlled Rome). And then the one Julius Caesar.

Short of assassination, how could he have been stopped? By a strong educated majority who cared little or nothing about the games.

See a similarity? What are the two main events watched on TV on Sunday and Monday? Take a guess. It certainly isn't anything to do with PBS.

the answer here would be

the section of the chart that represents a point at which a bill needs approval from a majority of people in both chambers to advance is j, as this is the only section before the bill becomes law which has both rows (symbolizing the chambers) converging into one, meaning that the two parts of the congress have to approve of it before it can march on with the process.