If people in my "country" can loot a minority by will of its numbers, why can't I get together a bunch of guys in my town and rob some neighbors? After all, they consent to being robbed if they don't leave.
That's why your arbitrary standard of concent is a load of horseshit.
That's why pure democracy doesn't exist anywhere.
Humans are fallable, that's why we have laws and basic legal documents like constitutions that secure some basic rights and principles to protect the minority from the majority. Beyond that, it's all compromise, which really can only be done through a majority vote.
Okay. My buddies set up a constitution with a variety of "laws" that we begin to enforce, but notably allows our enforcers to steal money from our "citizens". Every year we have an election to decide who gets to be an enforcer and who gets extra money taken from them.
Also, what happened to your bullshit about consistency, then? The majority is completely in control except when it isn't? What happened to consistency right there?
What separates a "rightful" government from the mafia? And don't give me that "consent of the governed blah blah" garbage, I didn't consent and neither did many others. Please, seeing as how you think that you have the consistent position and I don't, give me a clear definition of a government that separates it from something some toughs in a town or the Mafia could establish.