3 ms·
Yes. Any thinking person should be against democracy in the sense of "any time we can get one vote over 50% for something we should pass the something". This
by bzbarsky 10y ago
Yes. Any thinking person should be against democracy in the sense of "any time we can get one vote over 50% for something we should pass the something".
This is why the US government was set up with various undemocratic features. This is why there are things like constitutions that require supermajorities to modify.
Protecting minorities from the tyranny of the majority is one of the main purposes of good governmenance.
- mempko 10y agoAny thinking person recognizes that in the function "votes(issue) > X%" X isn't fixed to 50. I think people should get a say in proportion to how much it affects them and having X be 100% is a perfectly sane and optimal democratic decision process.
- bzbarsky 10y agoHaving X be 100% means nothing ever gets decided outside of very very small groups. See http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-reptilian-muslim-climatologists-from-mars/ http://slatestarcodex.com/2013/04/12/noisy-poll-results-and-... for some actual data on what people do when presented with polls.
- Dolores12 10y agoYeah, thats why Trump won with minority of votes. Just as you like. And i like it too!
- Broken_Hippo 10y agoThe US isn't even a democracy so it doesn't really apply, does it? He'd not have won in a democracy. Democracy screws folks over very easily.
- bzbarsky 10y agoPlease don't make assumptions about what I like.