Sociocracy offers a way out of the dilemma of Democracy vs. Totalitarianism
It is a false choice to have the only options be the Strong Man vs. the crowds.
Historically, we started with tribes. They were run in a multitude of manners, some of which would be at home with the way Sociocracy works. After that we went from Master/Slaves (Pharaohs and Emperors) to Feudalism (Kings/Serfs) with a dictatorship usually at the top (Totalitarianism).
The advent of Capitalism also allowed for the springing forth of democracy; except that the enterprises were still held in dictatorships while democracy was introduced in many forms. Even with Roberts rules of order and Parliaments, there was not a practical system for making decisions both day to day and at scale. Still we find ourselves needing one person to decide for all others or for 51% to win and 49% to lose.
Sociocracy, and the other similar systems like Holacracy, have the idea of preferences and preeminent or major objections. The idea that three people can agree on an acceptable solution rather than two winning and one losing. If one wants a steak, another is vegetarian, and the third suggests chinese cuisine, then chinese food can be found as acceptable to all even though it is not the preference of two of the three.
Us learning the principles and practices of Sociocracy can help families, cooperatives, neighborhoods, businesses, schools, and governments. From the boardrooms to the legislatures, involving people with multiple options that reach consensus of what is acceptable rather than preferences and objections will help us.