A reader of the Washington Post recently took offense at the use of the term “authoritarian” when referring to Hugo Chavez and his imitators in Latin America.  Much better, in the opinion of the reader, to call Chavez a “radical, majoritarian democrat” who is only looking out for the interest of the poor majority, albeit at the expense of minority factions. Well.  It sounds like the reader is describing nothing more than a version of mob rule, and even seems to be cheering the mob on.  It’s amazing how liberals today are less astute politically than those Americans who, over 200 years ago, ratified the U.S. Constitution, a primary goal of which was to minimize mob rule.  Will liberals never learn?