Good point. And one that strike closer to home. In the last month's Democratic primary in Pennsylvania, the pro-choice and pro-business Rendell won over the union-supported pro--gun and anti-abortion Casey (the symbolic importance of that victory was promptly noted by Katha Pollitt).
The broader issue is equating democracy with populism, which can be found in most, if not all, today's social movements on behalf of the "oppressed." The obvious fact is that "vox populi" is often quite reactionary - demanding equal opportunity to oppress others (women, gays, liberals, and other unpopular minorities) rather than to abolish oppression altogether. The popular hero Malcolm X is a good case in point - fighting the unequal power relationships between white and black MEN, but supporting the "prone" position of women vis a vis black men.
In that context, capitalist democracy has been so far the best protection of minority rights. It is no coincidence that the opposition to it is usually voiced in religious-fundamentalist terms, which has a populist veneer (appeal to the poor and the downtrodden) but is profoundly anti-democratic in its essence (the "god bless us and screw anyone else" mentality). Claudia Koonz, (_Mothers in the Fatherland_) shows that the Nazi movement in Weimar Germany was a watershed of populist misogyny and opposition to Weimar's liberal democracy. The mujahadeen rebellion in Afghanistan (which prompted the Soviet intervention) was a reaction against social reforms pursued by the Afghan government. Even Soviet-style socialism, that initially did quite well in combating popular bigotry of the masses (sexism, anti-Semitism) to promote internationalism, women's liberation and human rights eventually degenerated into jingoistic hatemongering.
wojtek
>