Such constraints on freedom as private property, that is, capital accumulation in the hands of private entities, and the right to privately own land and resources necessary for human survival and the full development of human potential, are inconsistent with this definition of democracy. With the fuller definition of democracy comes the recognition that each individual is dependent on society to become a human being, even to become individualized. Therefore, the liberal version of democracy is a false ideology of individualism. Mittelman, James H. 1997. I want to reinforce once more the usefulness of making a distinction between democracy and liberalism.
Liberalism is another political economic animal entirely.
Liberalism was invented to counter democracy. The problem that gave birth to liberalism was how to contain the dangerous classes, first within the core, then within the world-system as a whole. I hope this clarifies the two types of democracy. As long as we can keep the majority believing they live in a democracy, and as long as we can muddle social scientific theory and practice with vague and ambiguous terms, we can short-circuit the attempts of organized segments of the masses to challenge the hegemony of the ruling classes and ruling elites. Yet, if we want to make our words mean anything in social science, and we want our theories to approximate empirical and relational reality in some fashion, then I recommend that we design some manner of distinguishing between these two very different, and arguably diametrically opposed, conceptions of government.