Is Now The Time for a Direct Democracy?

[decoski]

I am an American. In the USA we have a representative republic where we elect Representatives who supposedly represent us. However, these "representatives" seem to be more interested in getting re-elected and appeasing the will of special interest groups. My question is the following: with the access of instant global information through the internet and satellite broadcasts, should we even have representatives? Why not a direct democracy where the people decide what happens through internet voting. I haven't thought through how this would be implemented and who would oversee it, but it makes for an interesting thought. The people deciding what is done and when. What do you think?

[James Peter]

It would be a complete desire. You thought government by media was bad now? Wait and see how much worse it would get...

[Pilgrim]

In general the public is too dumb and/or unwilling to be informed or bothered. Look how low voter turn out is to begin with. Do you really want people who care that little to be making all the decisions? Let's work on getting as many as possible to simply use the voting system we all ready have first.

[James Peter]

By 'desire' I of course meant 'disaster'. Oops.

[Durthorin]

Some how I don't think there would be much change, those that are to lazy to vote now would still be to lazy to vote. What you would have to do as part of it is get rid of the electoral college and that even tho its a relic of a different age is going to be hard to do.

An form of direct democracy that was nation wide would essentially bury any minority opinion. religious, cultural or economic. Consider now that certain special interests control certain states, to get those electoral votes you have to appeal to that special interest. In the case of the deep south for example you end up with Christian conservatives and/or the civil rights movement. Which means you have to pay attention to what they want.. Neither groups complete agenda is shared by the majority of US citizens, so.. a direct democracy would see candidates ignoring them in favor of drawing from the larger pool of national voters.

The same would apply to urban vs rural voters, poor vs rich.. All in all a pure primacy of the majority would mean the oppression of the minorities.

Brighid Bless, Dur

[Lady Macbeth]

I have to agree with Dur. As tempting as the idea of "direct democracy" is, unfortunately I am one of the "minorities" of this country who would suffer for it. I'm Pagan and bisexual - there's no need to tell me what kind of impact direct democracy would have on my life, considering the discrimination I am faced with every single day. I don't have the option (money) to move to Canada or any other more accepting and socially-progressive country, so I'm stuck facing life here - I unfortunately need the protections granted by some of those "special interest groups" that get their candidate into office.

[Timothy Leary]

No, I am absolutely opposed to direct democracy in the sense that most people understand it. It simply turns into mob justice.

However, I could support a decentralized version of it - as decentralized as possible. Of course, that is the basic idea of libertarianism anyways.

[Tickle Me Mercury]

I am an American. In the USA we have a representative republic where we elect Representatives who supposedly represent us. However, these "representatives" seem to be more interested in getting re-elected and appeasing the will of special interest groups. My question is the following: with the access of instant global information through the internet and satellite broadcasts, should we even have representatives? Why not a direct democracy where the people decide what happens through internet voting. I haven't thought through how this would be implemented and who would oversee it, but it makes for an interesting thought. The people deciding what is done and when. What do you think?

No. No no no no no. Please no.

Can we say Ochlocracy?

[Timothy Leary]

No. No no no no no. Please no.

Can we say Ochlocracy?

You think I'd get banned from Wikipedia if I had their entry on democracy redirect to their entry on Ochlocracy? :grin:

[technomage]

You think I'd get banned from Wikipedia if I had their entry on democracy redirect to their entry on Ochlocracy? :grin:
Yes. :glare:
















But it is an amusing thought.... :hehe:

[Meh_Gerbil]

I do NOT want a direct democracy.

Incidently, if our direct election of representatives keeps putting in boneheads how is it that a direct democracy would fix anything?

[Tickle Me Mercury]

You think I'd get banned from Wikipedia if I had their entry on democracy redirect to their entry on Ochlocracy? :grin:

Hehe. Or change the entire entry for democracy to "two wolves and a lamb voting on what to eat for dinner."

[Timothy Leary]

Gotta love Thomas Jefferson, Mercury.

This thread is making me hate the fact that I'm not going to be able to fulfill my First 1000 pledge. grr....

[Kriegel]

It's not the time for a direct democracy. I'm not sure if it ever is time.