“American democracy must be a failure because it places the supreme authority in the hands of the poorest and most ignorant part of the society.”

Macaulay exhibits himself as an igrorant and arrogant fool

I don't know where to start with this. The de jure U.S.A. was never a democracy. There is a huge difference between a democratic process and a democracy. A democracy is a forest (by numerical superiority) with out perception of an individual tree (no rights exist unless the majority declares such temporary state of affairs). A democracy is a mentality of numerical superiority being a god (with ability to create law), forcing its supposed will on a minority. A democratic process can be applied to a representative republic where each individual is a sovereign noble (rights are inalienable). In such formalized republican form of government natural law is recognized as already existing and it is up to the individuals to discover such by reason, logic, experience, etc. and then use such tools as codes, ordinances, regulations, rules, statutes, etc. to define the law for man's administrations. In the America of Macaulay's day, the majority did not directly elect senators, the president, certain judiciary and others so that the law would reign supreme as is averse to the despotic malefactor's enforcing their rabble's will.

Macaulay is right in the sense an economically deprived and an intellectually challenged electorate tends to ask for a government that 'doles out' often and also one that always preoccupies itself of mundane and secular matters without wanting a debate based dialogue between the governed and the government to arrive at a 'long term policy' that is most natural to the Nation.

It's not so much 'democracy' as with the 'jurisdiction.'  The US federal government's jurisdiction was restricted to a 10 square mile patch of swampland, all else belonged to the sovereign and free states who formed the federal government with explicit duties and some explicitly prohibited powers in case clever lawyers might find a way to pervert the plain meaning of words. 

242 years later, the federal 'jurisdiction' has expanded across the entire nation and even into other countries' sovereign territory all over the world.  By redefining through judicial precedent the boundaries of 'jurisdiction' and 'elector,' the fox is now guarding the hen house. 

Through judicial fiat, power has been and continues to be centralized to the nations' capitals and to their central bankers running the Monopoly game.  Is anything and everything up for vote?  And what are the limits to what those elected can regulate and tax/take?  Who are the ultimate decision makers really?  Not the voters ...