Yes,democracy and freedom no doubt go hand in hand.

No, freedom is not given or static, so it must be maintained through constant behavior. Democracy is a check and balance system. The idea is to prevent the concentration of power in the hands of a few people, which will definitely cause democratic imbalances and ultimately collapse.

"In the past, when the people of Athens acted and had the courage to fight, they controlled politicians, while politicians had wallets and managed everything.The theoretical funds (State grant for the poor) or Boedromia parade (in commemoration of the Apollo festival), thank you, your masculinity has reached the climax. "- Demosthenes

In this case, democracy and advertisement do not contradict. If anything, democracy and advertisement complement each other. Democracy promotes ideas of freedom and personality, and advertising is a way to guide ideals. Advertisers should have the right to say what they want. If they are not touched, democracy will restrict them, but in addition, they deserve the same opportunity as others did.

Older generation thinkers realized that freedom and democracy are not necessarily closely related. John Stuart Mill of the late 19th century was a lifelong democratic activist, but he feared that individual freedom would shrink if it claimed that the government expressed the will of the majority. Mill Gordon, Bertrand Russell, who was born in 1872 and died at the age of 98 in 1970, shocked and shocked many people. It is a democratic society, but in a way it is not that free. For Russell, like Mueller, freedom is one thing, democracy is another. This is a very troublesome viewpoint, but I think it is basically correct.

I am shocked by the fact that thousands of politically educated scholars have blinded the reality that democracy and freedom are closely related. Teach democracy, and personal freedom did not decrease over time. In fact, some democracies became totalitarian states immediately after their establishment. The extreme example is democratically elected Adolf Hitler. Over time, all other democracy, including us, will not be liberal. This is inevitable. According to the definition of democracy, the majority dominated the minority, individuals fail. Most people choose to rectify certain injustices and continue to pass legal expressions designed to benefit those who elect them. All of them lead to unintended consequences that more rules are needed. Over time, degrees of freedom decreases exponentially with unlimited laws, regulations, and the tax cycle of laws and regulations.

Freedom and democracy are different. Democracy solves the problem of how the public sector fulfills its duties. Democracy is even greater when individuals vote on matters assigned to the public sector. On the other hand, freedom involves relationships among people in the private sector. Freed means that individuals can choose a way to spontaneously dialogue abroad. The latest news and discussions on Eastern European reforms are focused on the progress of democratization in the public sector and more important issues on how human activities are distributed between the public sector and the private sector I am ignoring it. There is an authoritarian but very small public sector and you can imagine a much more free country than a country with a democratic but very large public sector.