The term "democracy" can be an abstraction, or it can be real.

The term "democracy" can be an abstraction, or it can be 'real'. Obviously the distinction is between a linguistic term and a 'reality'. Understandably, the term 'reality', being a language term, can also be problematic. But, I use that term, in the sense of 'real', as 'contrasted' to a purely 'language term' that has no referential basis in 'concreteness'. The reason for making this distinction is that it is very easy for a government to verbally claim to be a Democracy, while at the same time, never implementing, in a 'real way', any policy that reflects a 'democratic spirit' viz., the freedom and equality of the individual. Of course, we can thank 'political language' for that. It wasn't just the Linguistic Turn, that contaminated the language game in politics, because those political shenanigans have always been present in politics. Of course, the Linguistic Turn didn't help either. Nevertheless, most language terms have a 'language aspect' and a 'real' or 'referential aspect'. Most individuals don't really have to worry about these distinctions, because most ordinary 'language usage' is used in a 'real' fashion. By that, I mean sort of like, "that's what I said". However, I refer specifically, to the function of Nations, Countries, and governments that function for the 'purpose of governing' i.e. to 'close the gap' between the 'spoken word' and the 'policy implementation'. In different language, to 'relate', in a 'real way', the One 'to' the Many. The term "Democracy", can be used theoretically or practically, i.e. it has an abstract nature and a 'real' nature. The practical is usually exhibited in the Law, policy, or activity, being implemented. People can 'talk' democracy, or, they can 'live' democratically. Often, politics uses words and language terms, to 'hide behind' and to 'confuse'. As an example, I usually, use the familiar scenario; Q. " why are we bombing 'them'? Ans. "we're bringing them democracy". (whether the bombing is justifiable or not, the answer is pure gibberish.) Democracy has to be made 'real', because it relates to the real individual, at the Bottom; it relates to you and I. Democracy cannot be just a conversation, it has to be 'real'. Sure, we can do the "Talk", but we also have to do the "Walk"