Journeyman Philosopher

As stated I wanted to follow up briefly on exactly why I think democracy’s are incompatible with majority governments. As so today I want to issue a question to my readers on the topic of majority governments justifiability.

Here’s what I think generally first: Mature voters acknowledge that no party has all the answers, and the only way to acquire results that fairly represent a nation of different ideals is through discussion by different parties in an environment which ensures they will be taken into consideration. A majority stifles this ability.

Today I had the opportunity to discuss this concept with a friend. We agreed with somethings and developed the following question:

How is a majority government justifiable in a democratic country, when in essence through parliamentary process and the standard unified fronts of political parties inadvertently the minority’s power of government will be stifled? Does this not create a winner/loser mentality of politics which is incompatible with our intrinsic values within a democratic nation?
An example of this follows; party A has a 65% majority while party B has a 35%. When matters of interest are brought to the deemed acceptable house of debate and a vote is taken, due to the unified nature of political parties, party A will always get their way. In such a manner party B is alienated from its political power in the manner in which it is simply not able to create change, and as such the 35% of Canadian voters that were represented by this party are alienated with it.

As a Canadian voter or even a external viewer on the Canadian system, what do you think about this?