What does "They express the revolt of a great mass of human common sense against it." in this passage mean?
There appears to me to be no escaping from the fact that all such institutions as a Senate, a House of Peers, or a Second Chamber, are founded on a denial or a doubt of the proposition that the voice of the people is the voice of God. They express the revolt of a great mass of human common sense against it. They are the fruit of the agnosticism of the political understanding. Their authors and advocates do not assert that the decisions of a popularly elected Chamber are always or generally wrong. These decisions are very often right. But it is impossible to be sure that they are right. And the more the difficulties of multitudinous government are probed, and the more carefully the influences acting upon it are examined, the stronger grows the doubt of the infallibility of popularly elected legislatures. What, then, is expected from a wellconstituted Second Chamber is not a rival infallibility, but an additional security.
*The text is basically talking about how the second chamber is needed as an additional security, since the first chamber is not perfect and can make mistakes.
If it was simply "They express the revolt against it," then I could understand, since it would just be rephrasing the previous sentence (=the institutions are opposed to the belief that public opinion is supreme). But once "of a great mass of human common sense" is put back in place, it makes no sense to me.
The revolt of someone against something means someone is revolting against something, right? Applying this equation to the sentence in question would then result in "A great mass of human common sense is revolting against it," meaning the masses are opposed to the belief that public opinion is supreme. But obviously this makes no sense. After all, why would you reject something that benefits you? Could someone explain this to me? Thank you.