This brings to mind the government set up in The Moon is a Harsh Mistress: it takes 2/3rds to pass a law, but only 1/3rd to repeal it.

The thinking being if a law isn't good/useful enough to garner 2/3rd support, it shouldn't be law. And if a law is so bad that it can't even get more than 1/3rd the people to support it, it should no longer be a law.

Sadly, I don't think it'd work today. People are too divided, it's too easy to import the votes you need, and people are too lazy to understand a law beyond the headline or what the news tells them about it.

Cameron put a Eurosceptic in charge of the Remain campaign, and Nick Clegg - supposedly an arch Remainer - went to work for Meta after Cambridge Analytica and its contribution to Brexit became public knowledge.

The public were conned. The oligarch-adjacent ruling faction of the ruling class knew exactly what they were doing, the lack of specificity for any Leave plan was deliberate, the lies and propaganda were cynical and calculated, and they were delighted with the result.

Then they gave us Boris as the first of a succession of clown car comedy Prime Ministers, and started hyping Farage.

It's all a stage set. The public in the UK have zero influence on any of these developments.

Democracies require supermajorities for stuff all the time, it's pretty typical, especially for constitutional changes.

And in this case, it would also mean that Britain would've joined the EU with a 55%+ majority as well.

There is nothing inherent to democracy that says that everything needs a simple majority for a decision.

Hm, which is worse: An entire country of millions of people suffers from the shortsighted actions of a few with reduced quality of products, increased prices, worse access to other countries, and a host of other problems...

...or we have to listen to some people whine?