Despite the changes technology has necessitated, the country has kept its committment to "democracy," though the focus of the definition has changed. Representation has always been important. In the three periods of time evaluated here, the party desiring representation shifts.
The founding fathers' focal point was property. By limiting the act of suffrage to property holders and having one of the House's quota be determined through property, it was suitably represented. Equality for these citizens was the equality of social standing.
The 1880s saw the shift of representation moving to each of the three classes and expanding beyond government. Workers desired representation to the factory managers. Factory managers desired representation to the factory owners. Factory owners desired representation with the European elite. Government reflected this splintering of the people and created a doctrine of individualism. Social Darwinism allowed the political unrest to remain.
Representation during the 1960s expanded to include every special interest group. The country looked to the courts to maintain the "democracy" and equality of each minority.
Through it all, technology has been the motivating factor. Whether it caused the split in social levels or helped carry the message of representation and equality to the people, the government continually responded to the needs of technology. We have shifted our definition to incorporate whatever problem technology has created.
Currently, the cry is yet again being heard that technology will ruin democracy. And as always, there is a responding cry that technology will actually heighten democracy. One thing is certain, technology will change democracy.