13 ms·

The majority of population isn't in place to make honest, rational choices unaffected by feelings, culture, religion (I wanted to state educated, but education

by tdkl 10y ago

The majority of population isn't in place to make honest, rational choices unaffected by feelings, culture, religion (I wanted to state educated, but education doesn't necessarily mean that the choice would be on the rational side) and media influence.

_nalply 10y ago
And do you think Switzerland is different?
- tdkl 10y ago
  No I don't need to, they've shown they're different. Can I turn the question around : do you think this would work in USA, India and Brazil (random countries, nothing specific)?
  - herbst 10y ago
    I honestly think e-democracy would work everywhere after a few years of total chaos.
- _nalply 10y ago
  This is controversial, but I think any nation can have direct democracy adapted to the nation's culture. It's just that the Swiss have more than a hundred years experience with direct democracy and have learnt for the most part to be diligent in their decisions.
coldtea 10y ago
>The majority of population isn't in place to make honest, rational choices unaffected by feelings, culture, religion In a real democracy, they're not supposed to either. If their culture, religion, etc is important to them, it should definitely affect their decisions, and that's the democratic way. Same for their feelings. Democracy is not about voting what's "right" (who is to say? you?) but about getting what the majority wants. And there's nothing unhonest about letting culture, religion and feelings affecting your vote. What you describe as your ideal democracy where people only make "rational choices" is rather the old republican idea of sages who know better than the people (like the "founding fathers" in the US) and encode some norms forever. "Rational" used in this sense, is totally normative -- "what I think is rational" or "what those experts say it rational and good for you", and in the end undemocratic.

by tdkl 10y ago

_nalply 10y ago

And do you think Switzerland is different?

tdkl 10y ago
No I don't need to, they've shown they're different. Can I turn the question around : do you think this would work in USA, India and Brazil (random countries, nothing specific)?
- herbst 10y ago
  I honestly think e-democracy would work everywhere after a few years of total chaos.
_nalply 10y ago
This is controversial, but I think any nation can have direct democracy adapted to the nation's culture. It's just that the Swiss have more than a hundred years experience with direct democracy and have learnt for the most part to be diligent in their decisions.

coldtea 10y ago

>The majority of population isn't in place to make honest, rational choices unaffected by feelings, culture, religion In a real democracy, they're not supposed to either. If their culture, religion, etc is important to them, it should definitely affect their decisions, and that's the democratic way. Same for their feelings. Democracy is not about voting what's "right" (who is to say? you?) but about getting what the majority wants. And there's nothing unhonest about letting culture, religion and feelings affecting your vote. What you describe as your ideal democracy where people only make "rational choices" is rather the old republican idea of sages who know better than the people (like the "founding fathers" in the US) and encode some norms forever. "Rational" used in this sense, is totally normative -- "what I think is rational" or "what those experts say it rational and good for you", and in the end undemocratic.