The important difference between democracy and ochlocracy - while in both cases majority rules - in democracy the rights of minority (of even as small as one individual) are protected thus limiting the power of the majority while in ochlocracy the majority's power is unlimited. Thus preservation rights of minority, even and especially when you don't like those rights being utilized by that minority, like say the free speech right by nazis or requirement that law enforcement gets search warrant before intruding into the private space, physical or virtual, of even obvious criminals, is among the most important actions preserving democracy.

Ochlo-democracy decided to put Socrates to death.

I'm convinced political parties devolve into corruption by wealth "regulatory capture"-like malignancy in under-regulated, greed-driven, individualistic, low-trust societies.

Sortition is one way out. Throw out the political parties, divide-and-conquer social divisions, distracting team-sport animosities that distract for 1-2 years. Instead, choose functionaries from professional societies at random to fulfill a 2 year term of public administration in roles that would otherwise be hotly-contested. No more political control and chaos driven by the 1% or the 99%. While that would mean an end of the failed democratic experiment generally, it would eschew fascism, kleptocracy, ochlocracy, and oligopoly. Just plain, random persons fulfilling their civic duty to keep basic civic functions going. Feedback from the populace would arrive in the form of comments, suggestions, and petitions that would be taken under advisement. Infinite freedom to choose criminal or actors to abuse power leads to no freedom at all. The so-called "this is the best form of government apart from all others that have been tried" is itself fallacious and a lie without evidence.