3rd may consitution was step in democratic direction. When we look on futher plans of it's authors we are sure what they wanted to do after abolishing veto.
Sorry but you are in historic denial. OK, let analyze this case step by step
1. Nobleman whom were not landowners were stripped the right to vote. Yes or not?
2. Nobody gained the right to vote instead. Yes or not?
Thus in general much less people had the right to vote.
Additionally king gained some additional competences. Read this constitution, it is short and available online.
As far as "liberum veto" is concentrated... This law was to the same extend anti-democratic and anti-monarchical. It was simply stupid, because completely unpractical. So, by abolishing veto our country moved towards democracy and
monarchy to the same extend. However as I mentioned earlier other paragraphs of this constitution reduced democracy.
With which part of this short analyze do you disagree and why?
Why not ? It is thread about Jew.
About Szczuka? If somebody would start to write about Jewish bolhevicks, I suppose you would not be very glad.