It seems to me your view is in conflict with democracy
I did not refer to our interpretation of reality. As I said, everyone has the liberty (and to some degree even the obligation) to doubt that. But if you want to abolish reality itself in order to have a "total" democracy, it indeed ends up in what Hielor pointed out: Let's have a vote on what the earths acceleration actualy is. We can do that of course, and if it gets accepted we can change all our material on the subject, but reality won't care in the end.
Also, while I stated above that doubt, to some degree, is even an obligation, that does not mean to just doubt and to nurish that doubt. It means actively doing something to reduce that doubt to a minimum possible. I.e. doing measurements and experiments by yourself to see if your doubt has any substance, or if it was just a weird Idea.
What it comes down to, in the end, is this: Do you believe in an objective reality, or not? I'm not refering to what we can practically know thereof. If it exists, our understanding of it can only be an aproximation of what it is and how it works, and we can never be fully certain. Still it makes a difference wheather or not I believe that it is there, because if I believe that, I also believe that there are interpretations that are closer to it than others, although we cannot always tell which ones those are. If you don't believe in the existance of an objective reality in the first place, any assumption has the same weight, because every assumption in the end is meaningless, because there's nothing to actually make assumptions about. You'll be getting a real problem with explaining the whole phenomenon of existance, though.
You say that as long as those in power agree with YOU, all is fine.
First of all, let's be honest here, everyone feels better if the government agrees with his oppinion, simply because it means that we won't have any trouble with it. It's also all what democracy is about in the end: Everyone votes for the guy that agrees with him the most.
But while that is comforting, it isn't my goal. If a government thinks it can change reality by the pure force of its authority, it is utterly insane, and I wouldn't want it even if they happened to agree with a few ideas of mine. For all you know, they'll declare themselfes God next.
Obviously I am talking about both, since they are inter-connected and since I've already said it was the comments about firing her (the teacher this topic is really about) from her job that got me into this thread in the first place.
And as I said, it depends heavily on the situation. In this specific situation, as I said, it would be a total overreaction. If you, on the other hand, would not have a problem with a physics teacher teaching such things, then I can officially declare that we disagree.
"Educate yourself!". That is such a good statement
That's what people should do
It's what I'm trying to do a lot, actually.