1. This is what one gets when he agrees that rights are based on majority opinion. If you agree/hold/concede that "others" get to have a say in your rights, you've lost the argument before it begins.
2. What does one expect when he legitimizes a coercive government? Handing a small group a monopoly on force? Agreeing that they are "accountable" through the election process (see above about agreeing to rights being based on majority opinion)? (As though elections are really a genuine accountability.) What does one expect when advertising, "Hey, all you power-hungry people who like to dictate to others how they should behave, how they should live their lives; we, the undersigned, agree that you have the monopoly on force and will only hold you accountable if we can get enough other people to agree you overstepped or had bad ideas." C'mon. Really? Does anybody really believe the moths* won't flock to the flame? Does anybody really believe the invitation won't attract the most power-hungry or arrogant, willing-to-boss-others sort of people? Really?
* Apologies to moths for comparing them to politicians.