I recently learned from this sub that the Founding Fathers of America were against Democracy, and that America didn't really become a democratic republic until the early 20th century.
Did Democracy have any real advocates during this time, or was it reviled by pretty much everyone in power? What were the arguments of either side?
There may be a bit of confusion there.
Democracy was basically a rough, simplistic thing in it's most base form. It was "rule by the people" which, in essence, means mob rule. So long as 51 out of 100 people vote to, say, steal another man's prized possessions, they could do that with no one stopping them. So long as a simple majority found large groups of people guilty of vague "crimes", they could execute them with nothing to stop them.
What the founders created is a Republic, a rule by law. That republic had democratic institutions (though some, like Jefferson, believed the right to vote should be extended to all men only when the populace was mostly well educated) but it was and is still a republic first and foremost.
Republics are and were romanticized, Democracies were feared.
To give you an idea of why Republics were romanticized. Rome had a system where in times of crisis they gave one man seemingly unlimited power in the form of a dictatorship, and when his term was up or the time had passed, he would peacefully relinquish his power.
And until the end of the Republic, this tradition stayed mostly true. This was because Romans believed firmly in their Republic, their society being ruled not by one single leader or a mob, but by laws.
To rule by law means certain things are out of the question, even if people vote on them. It means that certain rights are guaranteed and the country has a relative degree of stability rather than being subject to the changing whims of men.
To say your against democracy, at least back then, essentially meant you were against rule by the mob.