3 ms·

Look at it this way. With more direct democracy, people can finally get what they (f'ing) deserve, and they'll have no one to blame but themselves. No more hidi

Look at it this way. With more direct democracy, people can finally get what they (f'ing) deserve, and they'll have no one to blame but themselves. No more hiding behind the politicians they voted for. And even then, people still refuse to hold these people in power accountable for stuff they do. Maybe we need to hold the citizens accountable, and only then will we see sensible legislation at some point in time.

giantg2 6y ago
I still don't see that holding the citizens accountable. How many citizens write their reps, research a topic from an objective perspective, understand law and legal concepts, are trained in logic, vote, or even have time for these things. Even with record turnout this year (about 145 million), that's still about 90 million people short of the estimated number of eligible voters (235 million). If they aren't involved in the easiest activities now (voting), why would we expect them to participate in the difficult and time consuming activities (research, voting on specific legislation, etc)? Also, subjecting the intelligent and engaged people to the whims of the mob would not be what they deserve.
- deleted 6y ago
  [deleted]
- salamimonger 6y ago
  What I'm saying is, if the majority of people in a country that are willing to vote, want to vote in stupid legislation/policy that screws them over economically or whatever, they got what they (f'ing) deserved. Next time, they'll rethink their decisions and in theory, more people will turn out to prevent that from happening again.
  - giantg2 6y ago
    Not necessarily. Some groups are simply outnumbered. Rural areas are outnumbered by urban areas. There are already a number of laws that rural people think are stupid. We see this especially in states like NY, CA, and OR. CA and OR have movements in rural areas to break away from the rest of the state. These are also states that often have referendums.
    - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
      there is some truth to this and i have experienced this first hand. which makes me wonder: what is the ideal number for effective self goverance..as in representation by vote for taxation as well as governance. if i were to hazard a guess..it would be a range of 250 - 1 million.
      - giantg2 6y ago
        I'm not sure that it has a set number. The two ways that is see self governance succeeding is through a strong, homogeneous national (cultural) identity, or through philosophical enlightenment in the form of expansive tolerance of others and the suppression of natural tribalistic behavior. The national/cultural identity can be fragile due to the population changing and situations evolving. I do think population size plays a part in this, but I don't think there a hard number. The tolerance of others and avoiding tribalism is nearly impossible due to human nature. Just drawing the line on what is tolerable and what should be punished (law and crime) will at least divide the population into lawful citizens and criminals, if not political factions. Most people don't have the ability to self recognize confirmation bias (even very difficult for trained people to do).

giantg2 6y ago

I still don't see that holding the citizens accountable. How many citizens write their reps, research a topic from an objective perspective, understand law and legal concepts, are trained in logic, vote, or even have time for these things. Even with record turnout this year (about 145 million), that's still about 90 million people short of the estimated number of eligible voters (235 million). If they aren't involved in the easiest activities now (voting), why would we expect them to participate in the difficult and time consuming activities (research, voting on specific legislation, etc)? Also, subjecting the intelligent and engaged people to the whims of the mob would not be what they deserve.

deleted 6y ago
[deleted]
salamimonger 6y ago
What I'm saying is, if the majority of people in a country that are willing to vote, want to vote in stupid legislation/policy that screws them over economically or whatever, they got what they (f'ing) deserved. Next time, they'll rethink their decisions and in theory, more people will turn out to prevent that from happening again.
- giantg2 6y ago
  Not necessarily. Some groups are simply outnumbered. Rural areas are outnumbered by urban areas. There are already a number of laws that rural people think are stupid. We see this especially in states like NY, CA, and OR. CA and OR have movements in rural areas to break away from the rest of the state. These are also states that often have referendums.
  - jelliclesfarm 6y ago
    there is some truth to this and i have experienced this first hand. which makes me wonder: what is the ideal number for effective self goverance..as in representation by vote for taxation as well as governance. if i were to hazard a guess..it would be a range of 250 - 1 million.
    - giantg2 6y ago
      I'm not sure that it has a set number. The two ways that is see self governance succeeding is through a strong, homogeneous national (cultural) identity, or through philosophical enlightenment in the form of expansive tolerance of others and the suppression of natural tribalistic behavior. The national/cultural identity can be fragile due to the population changing and situations evolving. I do think population size plays a part in this, but I don't think there a hard number. The tolerance of others and avoiding tribalism is nearly impossible due to human nature. Just drawing the line on what is tolerable and what should be punished (law and crime) will at least divide the population into lawful citizens and criminals, if not political factions. Most people don't have the ability to self recognize confirmation bias (even very difficult for trained people to do).