John Stuart Mill is often characterized as a 'reluctant democrat' due to his nuanced and somewhat cautious approach to democracy, as highlighted by C. L. Wayper. While Mill was a staunch advocate for individual liberty and self-development, which he believed democracy could foster, he also harbled significant concerns about the potential pitfalls of unchecked majority rule and the intellectual quality of the electorate.

Mill's democratic theory, primarily articulated in 'On Liberty' and 'Considerations on Representative Government,' championed representative democracy as the best form of government for promoting human progress and individual flourishing. He believed that active participation in government was essential for developing citizens' moral and intellectual capacities. However, he was deeply wary of the 'tyranny of the majority,' fearing that a numerically superior but uneducated or self-interested populace could suppress individual freedoms, dissent, and the opinions of intellectual elites.

To mitigate these risks, Mill proposed several safeguards that reveal his 'reluctance.' He advocated for plural voting, where educated individuals or those in certain professions would have more votes than others, believing that their superior judgment would lead to better governance. He also emphasized the importance of a highly educated and informed citizenry, seeing education as crucial for responsible democratic participation. Furthermore, he stressed the need for robust protections for individual liberties, freedom of thought, and expression, even for unpopular opinions, as a bulwark against majoritarian oppression.

His emphasis on individual self-development, the cultivation of higher pleasures, and the role of intellectual elites in guiding society, combined with his fear of mass mediocrity and the potential for democratic despotism, positions him as a democrat who, while committed to the ideal, approached its practical implementation with considerable apprehension and a desire for checks and balances that would ensure quality and protect liberty over mere numerical equality.