I think it is important to remember that the design of our government was created by people who, at some level, felt the ordinary man (yes, no women) needed to vote for people who would represent them in making decisions about laws, etc. (even who actually gets to be President).

Limited democracy was what we had and still have, even at local levels. Now this is more efficient than asking everyone in the nation or local area to vote on everything that is proposed.

However, I think that, over the years, if not really at the beginning, the wealthier and more highly schooled felt they were the better people to make the decisions. They used their wealth (or that of others who supported them) to become those representatives.

I do believe that the "efficiency" of the system is rather necessary when the system grows in size. Direct vote on everything would be rather unmanageable. But such a system does rely on people who fairly represent all the people they supposedly represent. It depends on transparency in what goes on to get such people elected. And, I'm sure (or at least hope) the Founders expected honesty and contentiousness from such representatives.

Do we think we have that today?