question

Following Isaiah's thoughts, I came across a quote from him that says:
"There is no greater distortion of the concept of democracy than the assumption that the majority is authorized to decide on values. What is the difference between a dictator who decides what is good and what is bad and a multitude of people who decide on this matter? We say that the dictator is evil or stupid, but any person can be evil and stupid. That is to say, the majority of people can also be a majority of stupid and evil people. Therefore, the inner essence of democracy is not majority rule, but a regime in which the powers of the government are limited, regardless of whether it is the rule of an individual or the rule of the majority."
It seems that Leibowitz really did not accept the concept of popular rule. He actually claims that the people do not have the authority to decide the values ​​of the state? Leibowitz is essentially a juristocracy who believes in a Platonic council of sages? Isn't this liberal fascism?