Yes, I’m familiar with Arrow’s Theorem. It does not say that “there is no such thing as rational democracy”:

it is often expressed in a non-mathematical way with a statement such as no voting method is fair, every ranked voting method is flawed, or the only voting method that isn’t flawed is a dictatorship. These statements are simplifications of Arrow’s result which are not universally considered to be true.

For example, Score Voting passes all of Arrow’s requirements, but does not meet the majority criterion, since a widely-liked candidate can beat a highly-polarizing candidate that is preferred by the majority but hated by the minority.

However, I’m arguing that most people would actually consider this a good thing, since the widely-liked candidate pleases the population as a whole more than the polarizing candidate who was preferred by the majority.