A See-saw of Democracy

Black swan(book i'm now reading) is quite difficult to understand, especially for someone like me whose only knowledge of philosophy is limited to the syllabus i studied in the moral science books during my school years .I wonder if moral science is categorized under philosophy, because all i remember reading in those books are anecdotes describing how good deeds are rewarded, how to imbibe good values within oneself........ etc,etc.
While reading The Black Swan i came across two philosophy terms-Mediocristan and Extremistan,which i am proud to claim to have understood them(at least superficially). Black Swan illustrates Mediocristan as "When the sample is large no significant instance will significantly change the aggregate or total". Mediocristan refers to the Indian middle and lower class  which outnumber the remaining and overrule any singular event which is executed with an intention to impact the masses in a bad/good way. In other words the effect imposed by any element which lie outside the periphery of Mediocritanism is very subtle and can be easily mitigated by the masses which have major contribution to overall average.For example, events  like 26/11 which was a singular and major event perpetrated to destabilize the nation did not have lasting effect as they(perpetrators) had wished for, after a couple of days of mourning the entire city of Mumbai got back to its daily routine,this is where Mediocristanism played its part.
Extremistan is exactly opposite. According to the book "In extremistan, inequalities are such that one single observation can disproportionately impact the aggregate ".Best example of Extremistan is Indian government's yesterdays decision to increase the fuel price, this although a singular event had a huge impact on the aggregate i.e Indian public.Another example is 9/11 ,a singular event but had enormous after effects resulting an altogether shift in paradigm as far as issue like security is concerned.
One positive trait of any democratic nation is its ability to switch between Extremistan and Mediocristan attitude.For instance, when it comes to increase in fuel prices we adapt to extremistanism and accept that  increase in price was done out of necessity owing to decrease in rupee's value as opposed to dollar.We allow the price hike to affect us until we get used to it and the new rate of Rs.71.83 per litre becomes a new normal.
But when it comes to social/security issues -Mediocrity rules.I have already explained how we switched over to mediocritism when dealing with 26/11 after math.But what about issues like corruption,which side do we switch to?Remember the Lokpal saga?, when Anna Hazare protested for the Lokpal Bill we switched over to Extremistan and collectively made ourselves vulnerable to be impacted by this singular event(Anna's 15 days fast).When government made a blunder by arresting Anna,which was against the basic rights offered by constitution we felt the unbalance created by the governement between mediocristan and extremistan.This aggravated the scale of protest and government had no option but to relent before Mediocristan.Mediocristan Rules!.
My point is, democracy is like a game of see-saw between Mediocristanism and Extremistanism where the people have to be aware of the issues they are facing and not allow any trivial issues to affect them.Also they should switch over between these two categories wisely for the purpose of greater good.