3 ms·

I've been thinking about this for some time. What if: - we vote on topics instead of for parties - party affiliation ceases to exist at the national level (mig

I've been thinking about this for some time. What if: - we vote on topics instead of for parties - party affiliation ceases to exist at the national level (might still be useful for city counsils) - we vote for representatives standing for specific topics & solutions. After elections those representatives form working groups What this would avoid: - huge senates voting on topics they're unequipped to understand - voting the party line Obviously establishing such a system would require a massive overhaul of our governments, but I'd like to think there's something better than the currently existing democratic systems.

OnlineGladiator 7y ago
What makes you think most people want this? I don't think it's coincidence that most people vote the party line consistently throughout their lives. I think they identify with a party and it becomes a part of who they are. It sounds like you want something that encourages critical thinking. Call me cynical, but I don't think most people want to think critically. https://www.salon.com/2019/10/12/voters-often-parrot-the-party-line-even-when-polls-suggest-otherwise_partner/ https://www.salon.com/2019/10/12/voters-often-parrot-the-par... > Research shows that party has more predictive power than anything else.
yorwba 7y ago
Having separate working groups make decisions on a single topic each doesn't work due to overlap. If the Committee of Environmental Protection and the Committee of Energy Production disagree about the correct amount to subsidize installation of solar panels, you need some way to arbitrate between them. Even if there's no overlap in topics, they'll still compete for their share of the total budget. It's not like parliamentary systems don't have topical working groups already. If all members of a working group agree on a proposal and it fits within budget constraints, they can get it passed without much friction. Huge senates voting the party line on topics they're unequipped to understand are the conflict-resolution process for when there's disagreement on a topic. Being affiliated with a party is a compromise where you vote with the bloc on topics you don't particularly care about in exchange for having the bloc vote your way on topics you do care about, but they don't.
nabla9 7y ago
Working democracy is not solved only by voting. You have to discuss, negotiate, learn and organize with other people. You need political people who learn the things under consideration, and what other people think. How to get a compromise that satisfies most. If you vote for X and 60% votes yes, 40% no, those 40% are unsatisfied. Ideally you want negotiate and get a solution where X+b gets more than 60% of the votes.

OnlineGladiator 7y ago

What makes you think most people want this? I don't think it's coincidence that most people vote the party line consistently throughout their lives. I think they identify with a party and it becomes a part of who they are. It sounds like you want something that encourages critical thinking. Call me cynical, but I don't think most people want to think critically. https://www.salon.com/2019/10/12/voters-often-parrot-the-party-line-even-when-polls-suggest-otherwise_partner/ https://www.salon.com/2019/10/12/voters-often-parrot-the-par... > Research shows that party has more predictive power than anything else.

yorwba 7y ago

Having separate working groups make decisions on a single topic each doesn't work due to overlap. If the Committee of Environmental Protection and the Committee of Energy Production disagree about the correct amount to subsidize installation of solar panels, you need some way to arbitrate between them. Even if there's no overlap in topics, they'll still compete for their share of the total budget. It's not like parliamentary systems don't have topical working groups already. If all members of a working group agree on a proposal and it fits within budget constraints, they can get it passed without much friction. Huge senates voting the party line on topics they're unequipped to understand are the conflict-resolution process for when there's disagreement on a topic. Being affiliated with a party is a compromise where you vote with the bloc on topics you don't particularly care about in exchange for having the bloc vote your way on topics you do care about, but they don't.

nabla9 7y ago

Working democracy is not solved only by voting. You have to discuss, negotiate, learn and organize with other people. You need political people who learn the things under consideration, and what other people think. How to get a compromise that satisfies most. If you vote for X and 60% votes yes, 40% no, those 40% are unsatisfied. Ideally you want negotiate and get a solution where X+b gets more than 60% of the votes.