Representative government and mob-rule

Very far from it, in fact. This issue happens to be very much to the fore in UK at present, following the lack of success for those Scots who favoured independence from the rest of UK; there is now much talk about devolved representation to the extent that some feel that Scots should not vote in Westminster for or against things that don't directly affect tham and that, likewise, non-Scots should not vote on things that are deemed only to affect Scots. "Mob rule" and (unhyphenated) "democracy" are quite different phenomena and are by no means synonymous as you appear to seek to claim; if, however, "representative government" were to function in the manner that you imply it to do (or that you seem to suggest that it should do), people would only be allowed to vote for or against - or otherwise support or not support - those things that directly affect them - a scenario so unwieldy and unworkable that it might arguably be described as "mob misrule". Who, after all, is to determine (and how and on what grounds0 what will or might affect - "directly and immediately" or otherwise - whose lives? Don't forget that no man or woman is an island, even if he or she happens to live on one; this is all the more the case in today's interconnected world than it would have been half a century and more ago.

On the "strength" of his previous post in this thread to which I responded, I would almost hope that "for" ought to read "from"...

How fast are you running, from whom and in which direction?