Even if democracy did not encourage a more educated citizenry, it would still be the only morally defensible way to decide the laws that govern society, and would still be the best guarantor of liberty and rights. Lasch's argument, however, is worth remembering the next time someone wheels out ancient platitudes about people being too stupid for democracy to work.
In a perfect world, everyone's each and every need would be catered for but as we all know, this world is far from perfect. And so we aim to reach a consensus of what is best for most of us (including for "low information, non-city dwelling bigots"). And by doing this, we realise that representation can never be full in its entirety. And polarisation of opinion will always occur.
Members of Parliament don't need to have all the answers. Better if they don't. But the onus is on them - as elected representatives - to start an urgent conversation with people about how to reshape our economy for a richer Britain. If citizens sense this could be the beginning of a new participation, then 2016 could yet go down in history as the start of a revival of Western democracy.
It's not about Trump, Clinton or Brexit, but because the operating system, the process by which decisions are made which is like working on an old version of Windows 95 in 2016. We can do better. People have done better. It is happening in small pockets in Iceland, Estonia, Argentina, America, Australia, and Taiwan.
We need to instil more engagement and empowerment through our government representatives with the citizens of a democracy, so that socio economic issues are not all grouped together once every four years, and results such as these do not knock us sideways, but have been listened to, understood and reflected in our government long before we engage in constitutional decisions such as Presidential elections and EU membership.
You have the right to force a world I do not want upon me. I have the right to fight it. And I shall. Not with violence, but with debate. Not with coercion, but with facts. I will criticise you, but never try to silence you. I will accept the vote as valid but disagree entirely with the result. I recognise your majority but will declare you fundamentally, horribly mistaken.
When will we be ready to admit the Turkish model has failed? Maybe never for the implications of this admission are too overwhelming to consider, aren't they? Better to voice our concerns and turn the other cheek. We intervene in countries' domestic affairs only when it is convenient for us not for them, and now really isn't the time, is it?
What seems certain above all is the need to get this election over with, and to move on with a massively renewed mandate for our leader. And then - it will be time for top down reform and the redefinition of the party in the image of Corbyn and McDonnell. Having seen the desperate determination of the enemy within, and the lengths to which they will go - nothing less than a ruthless removal of such elements will now do.
Liberal democracy in the UK is not in good shape. Fears that our once triumphalist political culture is now falling apart are suppressed. "Uncertainty" serves as stop-gap euphemism for deeper disquiet. There is talk of new opportunities and proud self-determination, much patriotic bravura. But minorities suffer abuse, violence and even murdered, and there are portents of worse to come.
Weaponising allegations of abuse by opponents (or allegations of purges in response) may not be the same as weaponising the abuse itself but it is also unlikely to help. Insults are never an acceptable substitute for political argument, from whichever direction they come. Abuse in politics disfigures us all and it threatens us all.