The following from Fred Dallmayr's 2019 book "Post-Liberalism: Recovering a Shared World" .
In short, horizontally structured political system of equality and vertically structured liberty cannot accommodate each other. Not for long.
""The dominant political ideology today, especially in the West, is called liberal democracy.
Taken at face value, the expression suggests a basic synergy and even equivalence of its
constitutive terms. A major aim of this book is to show the fragility and, indeed, untenability
of this facile assumption. Far from being complementary or mutually supportive, liberalism
and democracy in our time are an odd couple, frequently engaged in radical antagonism or
conflict. What is the reason or source of this conflict? A simple (perhaps simplified) answer
is this: the two partners operate in radically different registers or contexts. While liberalism is
located as an orientation or ideology in civil society, democracy is a public structure or type
of regime. Since ancient times, it is customary to distinguish between at least three types of
legitimate regimes: monarchy, aristocracy, and democracy (or republic).1 Of these, the first
two are hierarchically or vertically ordered, invoking a metaphysical warrant for public authority.
By contrast, democracy is horizontally structured, invoking “only” a human warrant. With his
deep and correct insight, Montesquieu perceived democracy as a new public paradigm
anchored in equality and even the “love of equality” among citizens.
...
The central motto of the French Revolution was “liberty, equality, and fraternity”—which means
that liberalism was allowed or meant to continue despite the changed public paradigm. Initially,
the motto did not seem to be far-fetched; there was indeed a certain synergy between liberty and
equality (as was evident in different public factions).
As during the Hanoverian period in England, liberty seemed willing to accommodate itself to the
new political conditions. However, relations between the partners began to deteriorate steadily
during the nineteenth century. Several factors accounted for this derailment; all of them conspired
to push liberalism or individual liberty in the direction of verticality and radical superiority, thus
rendering it at odds with democratic equality. Among the prominent factors of the period were
Social Darwinism (the cult of rugged individualism), industrialization (and the erosion of agrarian
society), and—last but by no means least—capitalism (with its stress on private or corporate profit)."