Have you ever noticed how anti-democratic Democrats can be? Take the case of Michael Bennet, who is running for Colorado governor while still serving as U.S. Senator. If Bennet wins, guess who gets to appoint Bennet’s replacement in the Senate. Yep, Bennet! Neat trick, huh? Bennet himself initially was appointed to the seat.

The legislature could put an end to such nonsense by, say, mandating that whenever a governor appoints their own replacement, that person cannot run for the seat in the next election. Such a rule likely would have induced Bennet to resign earlier and let Governor Polis appoint the replacement. That’s still not very democratic, but at least it’s not self-dealing.

I worry that often we teach our kids a romanticized version of democracy rather than the real thing. As Churchill reminded us, “No one pretends that democracy is perfect or all-wise. Indeed, it has been said that democracy is the worst form of government except all those other forms that have been tried from time to time.”

Two wolves and a sheep

We should teach children not only that democracy is the self-rule of the people, but that at its worst it is two wolves and a sheep voting on what’s for dinner. It is voting to murder Socrates, perhaps the greatest philosopher of all time. It is electing Paul von Hindenburg, who then dissolved the Reichstag and appointed Adolf Hitler as chancellor. Sometimes it is the choice between a Giant Douche and a Turd Sandwich. Democracy is terrifying. Its dissolution is more so.

I was struck by an election-day story from Byron Reed of 9News titled, “Preschoolers learn democracy through breakfast election at Clayton Early Learning.” Here is how Reed opens: “Four-year-olds at Clayton Early Learning cast their ballots on Tuesday morning in a mock election to decide which new breakfast item should be added to their menu, learning valuable lessons about civic engagement and the power of having a voice.”

This incident does indeed offer important lessons in civics, just not the ones that Reed supposes. This “mock” election teaches kids that they should pretend an election matters even when it obviously does not. It teaches that often voters face preordained choices beyond their control, in this case between banana oat bites and croissants with strawberry chia jam. It teaches that unchecked democracy may spread to all aspects of life and that nothing is beyond its reach. It teaches that “news” reporters sometimes are more interested in generating click-bait and cheerleading statist propaganda than in critically reporting the news.

Imagine if someone brought forth a ballot measure trying to dictate everyone’s breakfast menu. Sure, that would be “democratic.” It also would be a grotesque abuse of governance.

Democracy’s hard lessons

The first lesson we should teach our children, then, is that the majority has no moral right, and properly no legal right, to violate the rights of the minority. Democracy without a Bill of Rights quickly descends to a tyranny of the majority. No, you don’t properly get to vote to ban hate speech, to ban someone’s religion, to censor publications you don’t like, to take people’s guns, to confiscate their property (except in special circumstances with compensation), to authorize warrantless searches. Or to decide what someone eats for breakfast. Most of life properly is beyond the reach of majority rule, and I think a lot more should be than is.

Sure, there are contexts in which people might vote on what to eat. A family might vote for pizza night over chicken, for example. A group of friends might vote on where to meet for breakfast. A school that serves food, facing a choice of two comparably nutritious and economical options, where adopting only one is feasible, might even let kids vote on their preferences. But these are all contexts of families, parents opting their kids into certain programs, or friends choosing to collaborate. Such votes are no model for democratic governance.

The founders set up a three-part federal government with a two-part legislature, with broad federal deference to state governments, specifically to limit political takeovers by hot-headed masses and demagogues. This founding skepticism of power and worry about its abuse should be part of every child’s education.

When children get a little older, we can teach them more sophisticated lessons about democracy. The field of public choice demonstrates that politicians and bureaucrats often act for narrow interests and that institutional shortcomings can worsen outcomes. In introducing the field, economist Alex Tabarrok warns, “Even today, it’s very common for people, even economists and political scientists, to put forward ideas which could only work if the government were a benevolent dictator.” William F. Shughart II also has a nice introduction.

Children also should learn about the pervasive problem of voter ignorance. The economist Bryan Caplan has out the book, “The Myth of the Rational Voter: Why Democracies Choose Bad Policies.” And the lawyer Ilya Somin wrote the book, “Democracy and Political Ignorance.” The problem is not only that many voters know little about policies, but that relatively well-informed voters can become dogmatic in their views, as political scientist Jeffrey Friedman worries in his book, “Power without Knowledge.” Older children are ready at least for lessons based on such works.

Recently I was talking with my child about liberalism broadly conceived, and I said the key idea is that individuals matter and have rights. A natural outgrowth of liberal individualism is the idea that the people of a society should be involved in their own governance. So I’m a huge believer in liberal democracy in the context of constitutional republicanism. But, if we wish to live in a successful society, we need to develop a serious understanding of the inherent limitations and pitfalls of democratic action.

Democracy is a serious business. Very often people’s lives literally hang in the balance. Parents, educators, and journalists should help children understand the nature of democracy, its complexity, its benefits, and its dangers.

Ari Armstrong writes regularly for Complete Colorado and is the author of books about Ayn Rand, Harry Potter, and classical liberalism. He can be reached at ari at ariarmstrong dot com.