The government is unpopular so democracy is good

The oppressive nature of the first past the post voting system must be clearly evident to anyone who has even for a short time examined elections. It is clear that in long-established democracies which use fptp that the system tends to result in the emergence of a two-party system because this maximises the utility of each voter's vote. If someone knowing this still prefers the use of fptp then it can only be because they do not like democracy itself and they wish to (knowingly) oppress voters. Perhaps they think that democracy itself is an invalid concept and that the autocratic government should not be challenged. To know that fptp frustrates the voters and to still endorse it shows that such a person is comfortable to allow the state to reject the views of the people. To accept the truth of Duverger's law and at the same time defend fptp means that such a person is in defence of tyranny. Someone who does not (knowingly) defend tyranny and yet still defends fptp must be in denial of Duverger's law. If someone accepts that fptp tends to result in tactical voting and yet is unperturbed by this fact is someone who is not offended by tyranny. Of all the people who defend fptp it is only those who deny the existence of (the truth of) Duverger's law who are not tyrants. People who defend fptp are tyrants unless they are ignorant of Duverger's law.