In a Democracy, when a 'Top with Power' loses control of the 'Bottom'; something is wrong.

In a Democracy, when a Top with Power no longer 'controls' the 'Bottom'; something is wrong. Of course, there's a 'Right way' to 'see' that and a 'wrong way'. The wrong way is when the Top uses 'Arbitrary Power','legal and Illegal', to quell the disturbance. That's 'antagonistic' and creates a worse situation. The Right Way is when the Top makes the 'corrections' connected with the disturbance. In a Democracy such a disturbance usually alludes to some 'Undemocratic activity' or 'occurrence' that has taken place within the 'Social' and creates the 'Social Unrest'. The Proper response by the Top is to 'explain' or 'correct' the so-called 'undemocratic activity'. Failing that, any move by the Top to 'quell' the disturbance by 'force' is 'Undemocratic' and a 'misuse of Power'. A 'Problem' at the 'Bottom of a Democracy' is not 'addressed' and 'quelled' with 'Autocratic Power'. Threats to use the 'Military Power' of the State, in such cases, is 'Autocratic'. The 'Individuals' in the 'Military' fight their own 'Relatives' in the 'Social'. They become the 'enforcers' of the 'Unrest'; Brother against Brother; Sister against Sister. That doesn't make sense. An 'Intelligent Democratic Top' knows, or should know, what to do and must attempt to 'quell' the disturbance by 'Democratic Means'. Otherwise the only solution is to 'replace the Individual' at the 'Top'.