Democratic republics vs 'mob rule'

[demi-conservative]

What is the difference between 'mob rule' and 'rule by the people'? Aren't they exactly the same?

[Joel]

What is the difference between 'mob rule' and 'rule by the people'? Aren't they exactly the same?

"In all cases where a majority are united by a common interest or passion, the rights of the minority are in danger. What motives are to restrain them? A prudent regard to the maxim that honesty is the best policy is found by experience to be as little regarded by bodies of men as by individuals. Respect for character is always diminished in proportion to the number among whom the blame or praise is to be divided. Conscience, the only remaining tie is known to be inadequate in individuals: In large numbers, little is to be expected from it….These observations are verified by the Histories of every Country antient & modern. In Greece & Rome the rich & poor, the creditors & debtors, as well as the patricians & plebeians alternately oppressed each other with equal unmercifulness….We have seen the mere distinction of colour made in the most enlightened period of time, a ground of the most oppressive dominion ever exercised by man over man. What has been the source of those unjust laws complained of among ourselves? Has it not been the real or supposed interest of the major number? Debtors have defrauded their creditors. The landed interest has borne hard on the mercantile interest. The Holders of one species of property have thrown a disproportion of taxes on the holders of another species. The lesson we are to draw from the whole is that where a majority are united by a common sentiment and have an opportunity, the rights of the minor party become insecure. In a Republican Govt. the Majority if united have always an opportunity."

-James Madison, Records of the Federal Convention, June 6


"The notion, that the people have no need to limit their power over themselves, might seem axiomatic, when popular government was a thing only dreamed about...In time, however, a democratic republic came to occupy a large portion of the earth's surface,...It was now perceived that such phrases as ‘self-government,’ and ‘the power of the people over themselves,’ do not express the true state of the case. The ‘people’ who exercise the power are not always the same people with those over whom it is exercised; and the ‘self-government’ spoken of is not the government of each by himself, but of each by all the rest. The will of the people, moreover, practically means the will of the most numerous or the most active part of the people; the majority, or those who succeed in making themselves accepted as the majority; the people, consequently, may desire to oppress a part of their number; and precautions are as much needed against this as against any other abuse of power. The limitation, therefore, of the power of government over individuals loses none of its importance when the holders of power are regularly accountable to the community, that is, to the strongest party therein....and in political speculations ‘the tyranny’ of the majority is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard."
--John Stuart Mill, On Liberty, 1859.

[demi-conservative]

What is this supposed to amount to? 'It's possible that the people restrain themselves, but usually they don't'?

[Joel]

What is this supposed to amount to? 'It's possible that the people restrain themselves, but usually they don't'?

You're wanting a summary of those quotes?
History shows that democracies (including "republican" governments) tend to increase their power and oppress people.
Rule by "the people" is a misnomer. It's always some people (e.g. a majority) exercising power over other people.
And so, "‘the tyranny’ of the majority is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard."

[demi-conservative]

Rule by "the people" is a misnomer. It's always some people (e.g. a majority) exercising power over other people.
And so, "‘the tyranny’ of the majority is now generally included among the evils against which society requires to be on its guard."

Guarding against the 'tyranny of the majority' means preventing the majority from ruling. That's how you get representatives who at the same time are supposed to prevent mob rule, but not be faithless electors.