Does that constitute an imposition though, that's the question. To impose something implies to force it on someone. Clearly if there is a law that you have to wear pink shoes, that is a law that must be forced on people, but a law against murder implies a purely defensive use of force. There are different senses of the word.
Is it neccessarily? Places like the UAE and Lichtenstein seem to do fine, so did Hong Kong under the British administration there. Plenty of Democracies have turned bad, see Napoleon, Hitler, etc.
Additionally, this is a false dichotomy, the entire premise of the American Republic was the rule of Law, meaning a strictly limited form of governance, in which neither the majority, nor the minority had any rule over most matters, and where rule was made by someone, it was on as decentralised a level as possible.
In any case that doesn't explain why non-democratic politics are in any way less just, and oppressing minorities doesn't appear any more attractive to me in principle than oppressing majorities.
