I think the author actually meant the social-mores of classical liberalism (freedom of speech, etc), which protect, imperfectly, from both regal tyranny and the tyranny of the majority.
I don't think we need to go off on the tangent of fake vs. real democracy here.
It is widely and correctly agreed that the "best" democracies have a combination of characteristics, including elections (so you can throw the bums out), personal liberties of the social kind, economic liberties, rule of law, etc. But it is fiercely debated -- to an extent irrelevant to this thread -- exactly which characteristics are most important, what constitutes having such a characteristic to excess, etc.
