Difference between De Jure and Majoritarianism

DE JURE vs MAJORITARIANISM: NOUN

A form of democracy in which decisions are made by a simple majority of some organized group
Rule by simple numerical majority in an organized group.

Confederal, Diarchy, Constitutional, Inalienable, Jural, Juridically, Protectorate, Constitutionally, Suzerainty, Sovereign, Defacto, De facto, Wrongfully, Lawfully, Legally

Statism, Reformism, Egalitarianism, Consociational, Monarchism, Centralism, Pluralism, Nationalism, Ideology, Ethnocracy, Absolutism, Constitutionalism, Exclusivism, Partyism, Ethnicism

Sovereignties, Confederal, Diarchy, Constitutional, Inalienable, Jural, Juridically, Protectorate, Constitutionally, Suzerainty, Sovereign, Defacto, De facto, Lawfully, Legally

Secularism, Statism, Reformism, Egalitarianism, Consociational, Monarchism, Centralism, Pluralism, Nationalism, Ideology, Ethnocracy, Constitutionalism, Exclusivism, Partyism, Ethnicism

As in the Weber case, such plans maybecome de facto, if not de jure, discriminatory.
He perceived that de facto intolerance could subsist under the veil of de jure toleration.
See, as to the competency of a wife de facto, but not de jure, Stark.
However, it does deconstruct the presumed boundaries between de jure and de facto slavery.
Uganda, it having been deprived of its de facto and de jure validity.
CPRM systems, de jure and de facto land tenure rights in Badakhshan.
Two of these forms include de facto and de jure standards.
De Facto Racial Isolation or De Jure Segregation?
What are de jure and de facto segregation?
Due to de jure modifiers, it is less worthwhile for you to expand beyond your de jure empire.

But this new era is of ethnic majoritarianism and erases differences, dissent and the rights of minorities.
But for many legislators opposition to the death penalty is a core value which they are prepared to put before majoritarianism.
Even where there are majority perspectives on these factors, embracing them raises questions about majoritarianism at the expense of minority interests.
The examination of result majoritarianism confirms that even the most controversial judicial decisions often enjoy popular support.
Parts IV and V explore, respectively, the doctrinal and normative implications of new majoritarianism.
The end result when such a ploy succeeds is simple majoritarianism, which can lead quickly to illiberalism.
It will decrease the pressure to resort to cultural majoritarianism.
This peripatetic journey towards majoritarianism may explain why negative rather than positive parliamentarism evolved in Norway.
Herein lies a danger of any constitutional theory couched in majoritarianism.
American republicanism, for it does not reduce to simple majoritarianism.