This enemy article notes that Madison Grant understood how democracy was designed to work (and indeed did work so long as voting was limited to the demos):
https://www.amren.com/news/2022/09/madison-grant-conquest-of-a-continent/When the people, rather than their rulers, had a chance to speak, their instincts were healthy. Grant recounts with satisfaction an 1879 California ballot to limit Chinese immigration, in which the vote was 154,638 to 833. “There have been few issues in American history carried by a more nearly unanimous vote,” he adds.
Essentially, democracy is a statistical device to minimize the probability of anti-tribalist decisionmaking. It is far easier for a monarch to decide to do what is ethical than for a majority of the demos to simultaneously decide to do so.
Note furthermore what kind of bloodlines Grant preferred to populate the demos to produce the kind of democracy he wants:
In his view, wealth and cultivation are always signs of better stock.
...
he is surprisingly unworried about the criminals who were transported to the colonies in the early days.
...
He also likes the rebellious, freebooting quality of early settlers.
...
he admires their pioneering, Indian-fighting spirit. As yet more rebels and dissenters arrived, they headed further west, opening the country.
What decisions are likely to be made by the majority opinion of voters of bloodlines like these? Now you know how democracy was intended by Westerners to work.