4 ms·

More citizen participation in democracy is a great thing, but not as simple as it sounds. Legislating is a complex, time-intensive job. Most bills are long, nua

More citizen participation in democracy is a great thing, but not as simple as it sounds. Legislating is a complex, time-intensive job. Most bills are long, nuanced and require real study to understand and vet. Armchair voting based on sound-bytes by casually engaged citizens can't work. We need paid people that are dedicated to the activity. Additionally, legal deal making is a necessary evil. If two parties are at odds with which direction to go, and simply cannot come to an agreement, one way we deal with that is by offering exchanges of laws. One side reluctantly agrees to go forward on one thing, in exchange for the other side compromising on an unrelated thing that they feel more strongly about. That's why many bills contain a cornucopia of seemingly unrelated mandates - it's how we are able to move forward at an impasse. How would independent citizens negotiate with each other?

matt4077 9y ago
That's argument for arguably one of the most interesting new ideas in "democracy" of this century: "liquid democracy" It allowed for people to choose to vote on individual issues. But when they recognised the complexity of certain issues, or just couldn't be bothered to make up their mind, it allowed to delegate their voting power to someone they trusted. You could delegate single issues, topics, whole fields of politics or even everything, and the recipient could do so again. The result would be a sort of "net of decision making". Of course the concept's prominence came and went with the rise and fall of the Pirate Party...
thriftwy 9y ago
Interested parties will have to explain their laws to voters, convince them that it makes sense to legislate their thing and not a competing law. The second one is very easy. Allocate voting points to every citizen. This way, they shop for laws they want every year.
neon_electro 9y ago
Is there a compromise where we just increase the number of highly-paid and highly-skilled representatives?

matt4077 9y ago

That's argument for arguably one of the most interesting new ideas in "democracy" of this century: "liquid democracy" It allowed for people to choose to vote on individual issues. But when they recognised the complexity of certain issues, or just couldn't be bothered to make up their mind, it allowed to delegate their voting power to someone they trusted. You could delegate single issues, topics, whole fields of politics or even everything, and the recipient could do so again. The result would be a sort of "net of decision making". Of course the concept's prominence came and went with the rise and fall of the Pirate Party...

thriftwy 9y ago

Interested parties will have to explain their laws to voters, convince them that it makes sense to legislate their thing and not a competing law. The second one is very easy. Allocate voting points to every citizen. This way, they shop for laws they want every year.

neon_electro 9y ago

Is there a compromise where we just increase the number of highly-paid and highly-skilled representatives?