Question

I saw that the Rabbi wrote about the override clause, saying that it exists in other democracies and there is nothing preventing it (from the standpoint of democratic theory) from existing here as well (though if I understood correctly, the Rabbi opposes it in the current constellation).
My question is: why is this acceptable? In practice, this clause exists only in Canada, and there they have a much stronger system of checks and balances than what exists here (if there is an override here by 61). And checks and balances are a truly essential part of a democratic regime, so if Israel does not have a mechanism of checks and balances, I can’t understand why we would remain a democracy.
That is, an override clause can be a democratic act in governmental system X and at the same time be an act that turns a regime into a non-democratic one in regime Y. Does the Rabbi disagree with this claim?
 
Thank you to the Rabbi for the site; it’s always enjoyable to read