First one must recognize that democracy is not a single thing.  Unless you define what part you are on, of the range that democracy exists, then you can't even begin to discuss its merits or detriments, its pros and cons.  Are we discussing two wolves and a sheep deciding democratically what to have for dinner?  Because that form of democracy fits very well into the idea of rule by majority, but also rule by the rich and rule by the strong.  And when you have this kind of democracy, and we do, someone is always going to get the short end of the stick, which in the end means government violence aimed at them.  If you act violently towards somone, you cant' possibly represent them.  Therefore, our democracy is really the definition of disorganized.  We have a war of all against all, an infinate division of ideas that can't be represented or even agreed upon by even a few people.

My point of view on elections is that if we are electing non-representative, non-accountable rulers, than I agree with your interpretation, that voting is futile.   If your only choices for representative are between people who you have never met, whom do not know or understand your life situation, your needs, or your desires for the future, and actually advocate for actions against you that you do not consent to, then what choice does one have other than to withdraw consent and not participate in the fraud that is an election in todays Canada.  One cannot withdraw funding of such a thing without find ones self on the run from the over reaqching arm of government and its mindless storm troopers.

On the other hand, if by vote and elect you mean a representative, accountable sheriff (as an example) to enforce natural law and keep the peace between neighboors and call up the militia (the armed populace) when trouble nears, then I would and will come out to vote.  But when that sheriff acts against the oath he took to me, acts to take power for himself or others, or in any way shows bias in the execution of his duties, it is the communities right and duty to defund such a person.  But canada doesn't have such people or positions.  We have no checks and balances, we have is violence, fraud and debt, and I refuse to vote for someone advocating those things.  I refuse to be quietly ruled by someone advocating those things. 

A community is a group of people with common needs and goals.  There, in a small community, democracy can work lovely.  But when such large and diverse groups, as have been created in the western world, attempt a democracy of hundreds of millions of people, there can be no agreement, there can be no concensus, there can be no community, because the individuals in that would be community have no connection to each other, have no bond as neighbors in common struggle of life against the elements, they have nothing in common except that they have been raised in a socialist educational system that venerated government.  When communities ceast to exist and individual survival is all that matters in the war of all against all.  When people see members of their community using the levers of government to steal from then via taxes and direct that moeny to their advantage, they see the polling station as one of two things, 1) a way to become a master and 2) a way to become less a slave, via gaining control (so they think) on the levers of power.

If I incorrectly stated that I believed there are people trying to undemocratically impose their will on society, I mis-spoke and I appologize.  My interpretation of the actions of the natural predators of human beings, are that they use any means necessary to accomplish their goals.  It is a fabian socialist mode of action, the sheep in wolfs cloths and the von Clauswitzian total war of attrition.