The oligarchical motif
An oligarchy is similar to a democracy, except that instead of the interests of the public, the government actually serves the interests of the rich and powerful. The idea of oligarchy is implied through motif in Dewey's argument, because he reminds people that if only politicians are involved in government, and if only wealthy people are likely to attain that kind of education and career, than it would technically be oligarchical in practice.
The public as a union of interests
The purpose of the public in Dewey's analysis is to unify multiple voices into a force worth yielding to. But, Dewey says people really only unify when something bad is unifying them, so the public is a reactionary force in Dewey's analysis. He wonders for many pages about whether the public could ever united to do something positive instead of only reacting, but nothing brings people together quite like actual strife.
Government as a self-perpetuating mechanism
Although times change, the ultimate authority in terms of legal power is a government that has self-perpetuating mechanisms that comprise it. Major changes to the government are unlikely, because the public is not united enough to change it. The public is not united enough, says Dewey, because the scope of the government is too large, but as he explains, the government is perpetuating systems that only work in small communities, he feels.
The minority motif
The views of the minority are not the views of the minority in their communities. For instance, a local city may be more or less diverse than another, so the diversity of a public cannot be taken for granted. Dewey revisits the idea of "minority," to suggest that in an ideal democracy, "minority" isn't a problem, because at small local levels, democracy is specifically suited to enfranchise minority views. He explains that the problem is there are "too many publics," so to speak, and not enough independent governments.
Legislation as enfranchisement
Words like "minority disenfranchisement" just smack of academic pretense, but that's why Dewey explains what he feels is the crux of government, which is the law. The law is a public facing tool by which the government shapes a populace by imposing rules that are compulsory. Obeying such a law is involuntary, so the only real place where enfranchisement truly occurs is either in the court, when a judge appeals a law, or when legislators change the law. How often does that happen? Not nearly as often as archaic laws get applied in communities where no one agrees with them. The latter option happens way more often unfortunately.
