Is Total and True Democracy the most dangerous or despotic form of government?

No such type of political system has ever really existed. But the common logic is that it would basically be no different than MOB RULE, the majority would be able to carry any vote and use law to enforce it even if it was unjust or immoral. A complete Democracy would function even under the best intentions as a popularity contest. Francis Marion the American Patriot of the Revolutionary war, is said to have spoken about Democracy this way; Why would want to trade 1 tyrant 3000 miles away for 3000 tyrants 1 mile away. In the political pendulum the extreme would be monarchical tyranny and the other extreme would be democratic mob rule.

Well Mr. Madison, there is a very good reason why the United States of America is a Republic as opposed to a True Democracy. I never thought True democracy would be a dangerous form of government until I read Plato's "Republic". Form Plato, I learnt that True Democracy results in tyranny of the majority and this opinions of majority can be manipulated by the politicians through the arts. It is the worse than an absolute monarchy in my opinion.

It's dangerous because if 80% of the population on agree on something yet 20% doesn't, then the 20%s opinion doesn't even matter.

That's why our founders made America a Republic with state powers, so that the individual had more power and more voice in their government rather than the entire majority.

Of course it doesn't matter what government you have, the majority tend to have the advantage regardless.

Well, it's obviously antithetical to despotism, so you might want to check your understanding of that word.

Dangerous, however, I will grant you. It subjects all people to the whim of the majority, leaving no protections for minority classes. And I mean "whim," too. Part of the advantage of a representative democracy is that by not putting every single issue to vote by the masses, we have more consistency to our flow of governance.

It's never been tried, though the Classical Athenians came close (if you overlook their failure to enfranchise women, slaves, and resident foreigners).

That brief experiment with radical democracy was a complete disaster. So yes, absolute democracy would seem to be geared to fail.

Yes,

Hitler was elected by one vote under a Democracy,

Russia has a Democracy,

Indonesia has a Democracy,

Jimmy Carter set up a Democracy in Iraq, it was so evil Bush had to put it down,

You can no doubt add to this list.

Yes, true Democracy is terrible. Because if we allowed each and every person to vote on each and every topic, it wouldn't work. The... umm not sure what exactially it is called, but what we have works the best. Voting people in to make choices is the way it should be.

"Have people do the job that they are suited for"

- Plato

Yes. When one vote can change policy, that one voter becomes the richest guy in the room.

It can not work in a country of over 300 million people, I don't know if that implies anything sinister.

The present system we live under is the most murderous system ever used on planet earth. It makes Hitler and Stalin look like boy scouts.