All hail democracy?

Dear Mr. Editor:
The volition of this writer (witness) is to show the contradicting use of the word “democracy” by the leaders and politicians. Thinking, observing, and a little research will reveal to anyone that “things are not as they appear.”
Not a day goes by without the leaders and politicians constant talk about “democracy” and bringing “democracy” to the oppressed foreign countries, etc., etc.
Why would a “constitutional monarchy” such as Canada want to spread “democracy” abroad and not “constitutional monarchy” that is its very own system? Does the English queen spread and promote “democracy”? Is she an advocate for “democracy.”
There were no monarchs in the history of mankind that ever gave up their royalties for “democracy!” Of course, there is always a first in everything.
Is it possible that the leaders and politicians mean “democratic process” instead of “democracy?” Well, Adolf Hitler also was elected by “democratic process.”
Or, is it barely possible that the use of the term “democracy” became a political tool to achieve one’s agenda?
Someone said: “If it doesn’t make sense, there is a buck in it.” The fundamental rule in any investigation is to “follow the money” and/or “who gains the most.”
What are the volitions of the leaders and politicians, who use the term “democracy” so indiscriminately? And why? Who gains the most in this “wag the dog” political charade of misrepresentation?
The meanings of these words are from Black’s Law Dictionary:
“Democracy: That form of government in which the sovereign power resides in, and is exercised by, the body of free citizens as distinguished from a monarchy, aristocracy, or oligarchy.”
“Monarchy: A government in which the supreme power is vested in a single person.”
“Constitutional Monarchy: Where the supreme power is virtually in the laws, though the majesty of government and the administration are vested in a single person.”
“Oligarchy: A form of government wherein the administration of affairs is lodged in the hands of a few persons.”
“Republic: A commonwealth; that form of government in which the administration of affairs is open to all the citizens.”
A little known historical fact about “democracy.” A long time ago, the Greeks tried “democracy” as a form of government—and it failed!
“Democracy” does sound good (especially if you are part of “. . . the body of free citizens . . .”), but it can’t exist (according to historical facts) as a permanent form of government because the majority will always vote for the candidate who promises the most benefits from the public treasury.
This loose fiscal policy will result in a collapse and “democracy” always is followed by a dictator, who manipulates by fear tactics!
In light of this historical fact about “democracy,” is it remotely possible that by pushing and promoting “democracy” so hard, the agenda is to “welcome” the dictator the sooner the better, since that is the next step in the process?
“There is nothing new under the sun.” and “Those who don’t learn from history are condemned to repeat it.”
Thank you,
Andrew Szell
Fort Frances, Ont.