You know, looking at it, they say power corrupts, and I would argue that this is even more the case in democracy. If your power is lost at the whims of a fickle populace, even the noblest of intentions will rapidly turn into a fight to win that next election, give in to the reckless short-term whining of the masses for just that one extra term to finish the plan, make that big change.
Your thinking is logical, but history has shown that putting power all in one place leads to corruption 100% of the time.
and you know what they say, "those who don't know their history are doomed to repeat it"
putting the power in the hands of the masses is a bad idea, yes, but putting power into the hands of one person is a WORSE idea...
I am a fan of Machiavellian thinking, as it provides a very true portrayal of the populace's untruthfulness and greed, however, I also feel that he was being somewhat unrealistic, as nobody can uphold all of Machiavelli's ideals and maintain their system perfectly...
Not only this, but if someone actually did manage to maintain a Machiavellian rule, the US would charge in and cut them down on the grounds of "tyranny and oppression"
we're as bad as the rest
terrorists
everything
