Direct democracy prevents the tyranny of the minority

It makes sense for the state to be democratic because if the state is not helpful to the people then it is good that they have the means to push back against the state. If the state is helpful then democracy will be no impediment to it.

Anarchists might claim that democracy has no place in a civilised society because it gives rise to the state. But amongst non-anarchists there can be little strong argument opposed to democracy. If the actions of the state are popular then democracy will not threaten them and if they are unpopular then (by definition) they are bad. The state is bad if it is unpopular, so tyrannies are never democratic by definition. Democracy prevents tyranny and only an anarchist can logically oppose democracy.

First past the post enables the tyranny of the minority which is prevented by direct democracy.