So your position is that the least harmful government we know of is democracy with no one left out of the process. That's reasonable. My history and poli-sci knowledge isn't good enough to say what might be lurking in "that we know of". However, there seems to be rather strong mechanisms by which especially democracy becomes disfunctional and corrupt.

That's the reasoning behind my admittedly loaded use of "entitled" here: I believe we have a responsibility to make sure everyone gets a say, because otherwise we end up abusing the ones who don't.

Ok, but it's confusing to mix normative and empirical/instrumental discussion together. Mixing them signals muddled thought, which makes it harder for people to interpret charitably. Try to seperate them as much as possible.

"The majority will tyrannize any minority without political clout, therefore we should make sure nobody is lacking in political power" is a much more useful statement than anything involving "responsibility" "rights" "enitled" etc. (mind you I think it's wrong, but it's at least composed of empirical predictions and instrumental suggestions that can be interrogated cleanly.)