Is an unamendable constitution undemocratic?

Encyclopedia of Opinion

Question: Is an unamendable constitution undemocratic?
Position‹3 of 3: It's a pointless question
Argument: There is no alternative

For states that already have an unamendable constitution, there is no alternative. Therefore, the question is pointless as it has no practical application.

The argument

If a state has a written constitution that does not allow for amendments or a replacement, there is no choice but to find a way to make democracy work without amending the constitution. The government could choose to ignore the stipulation that the constitution cannot be amended. However, in doing so, it would undermine any future constitution and open a Pandora’s box where future governments may choose to ignore fragments of the constitution at will.

Context

If a state already has a constitution that cannot be replaced or amended, there is no alternative.

Premises

[P1]If a written constitution forbids amendment or replacement, there is no choice but to make democracy work without amending it. [P2] A government could ignore the no-amendment stipulation, but doing so would undermine the constitution's authority and let future governments disregard parts of it at will. [C] Therefore, there is no alternative, which makes the question pointless.

Counter-arguments

A debate’s value is not in its application. We can debate questions like the existence of fate, the mind-body debate, and the veracity of rationalism which have no bearing or application on our lives or government systems but hold value as an intellectual exercise. Additionally, the statement is factually incorrect. There is an alternative. As long as the constituents have the ability to write a new constitution, there is an alternative course of action within democratic channels. The electorate can provide the country with a legitimate government willing to replace the constitution with a new constitution that is amendable through the appropriate democratic processes.

Rejecting the premises

[Rejecting P1] There are avenues for constitutional change, even under unamendable constitutions. [Rejecting P2] Debates purely for theoretical and abstract purposes still have intellectual importance.