Abstract: Huang Zongxi recognized two best regimes, or two perfect moral-political systems: one is the monarchy headed by sage-kings that is described by the Confucian Classics, while the other is the joint rule of a monarch and his ministers for the people that was proposed by Huang himself after he denied the legitimacy of his contemporary monarchy. In modern China, scholars differed with each other on whether Huang’s best regimes could be defined as democracy. As the concept of democracy comes from the Western tradition, it is necessary to go back to Western classics of political philosophy to rethink about what democracy means. Examining Aristotle’s Politics, Locke’s Second Treatise of Government and Rousseau’s Of the Social Contract, we find that the core principle of classical democracy is popular rule while that of representative democracy is popular sovereignty. Huang’s Mingyi Daifanglu ( 《明夷待访录》 ) does not endorse popular rule but the joint rule of moral and intellectual elites. And there is no sufficient evidence that the work supports popular sovereignty. Therefore, it would be hasty to conclude that the work favors democracy. In fact, it is more appropriate to understand Huang’s best regimes as aristocracy than as democracy.