4 ms·
While I agree with you that the risks are not worth it, there is the counterargument that votes are expensive. If votes were made less expensive it might be fea
by KSteffensen 8y ago
While I agree with you that the risks are not worth it, there is the counterargument that votes are expensive. If votes were made less expensive it might be feasible to put more things out for popular vote
Edit: typo. Stupid autocorrect set for the wrong language
- brewrwe 8y agoVores?
- sitharus 8y agoA counter argument to expanding popular votes, the reason for a representative democracy is so we _don’t_ have to vote on everything. If we’re electing representatives that we distrust so much we want to directly vote on more of the laws I think we should fix the election of representatives.
- owl_paste 8y agoIf we can't elect good representatives, yeah, I'd hesitate to assume we'd be any better at direct democracy.
- walshemj 8y agoWhich is a very bad idea referendums are a terrible way to make decisions see Brexit
- KSteffensen 8y agoYou're arguing there should be fewer public votes in a democracy? If you don't trust the public to make decisions like Brexit, why trust them to elect representatives? Note that some of the most shameless brexiteers were publically elected MPs.
- walshemj 8y ago1 A small number of mp's where Brexit most where not. 2 Yes I am saying there should be no referendums in an elected democracy its a terrible idea - Germany even outrights bans them in its constitution.
- KSteffensen 8y ago1. It seems like the tories have been at civil war since the referendum so the number can't be that small. Corbyn doesn't seem too unhappy about the idea either, although for different reasons than, say, David Davies. 2. Germany may ban them in its constitution, but it seems to work for Switzerland. Again, if you don't trust people to handle referendums maturely and responsibly, why trust people to elect representatives that will handle the same issues maturely and responsibly?