In a democracy a PM is but one citizen of the country.
He (his party) is elected by the majority of citizens to do THEIR will.
As for him doing what he thought was right, lets assume that is a correct statement. But that has nothing to do wth a democracy ... eg. I'm sure Pauline Hansen was doing what she thought was right but the electorate didn't agree & accordingly she was not put into a position of power where she would be able to action her thoughts.
On the other hand, a dictator (& I said benevolent in order to acknowledge that he probably believed what he was doing was for the good of the country) has no compuction to honour the wishes of the electorate (regardless of his personal opinion or individual beliefs)
So how was my statement so strange ?
The evidence is that the majority of the electorate seems to agree.
