3 ms·

Not influencing what is going on this way - not everything has to be standard and decided by a majority, multiple options can be done at the same time. Second t

Not influencing what is going on this way - not everything has to be standard and decided by a majority, multiple options can be done at the same time. Second thing is reducing the size of government - not everything has to be the same for literally millions of people and thousands of square kilometers, and especially not for hundreds of millions of people and entire continents. Some things shouldn't ever be voted about.

brnt 6y ago
Subsidiarity of responsibility/scope between layers of government seems orthogonal to the way we (s)elect people in charge. > Some things shouldn't ever be voted about. In many democracies, certain things are codified into constitutions and are hard to change, and typically not frequently, if ever, voted on. Is that what you mean?
- emteycz 6y ago
  Democracy is not just the way we s/elect people in charge, it's also the idea of having people in charge and having a single way of life for millions. The country where I live (Czechia) was praised for having one of the strongest constitutions ever written. Now its been destroyed by a populist government for a decade, with the destruction rate multiplied with the pandemic which this government is unable to do anything about while constantly trying to shift money into their pockets. Thanks to the pandemic they can do anything regardless of the constitution or law, but even before the pandemic we found out the constitution is worthless if there isn't anyone with the power to protect it, and that any wording (specific or broad, doesn't matter) will bend to the will of the judge. If constitution is what you rely on you're in for a bad ride, you need ordinary people with guns ready to defend it. I will not trust a constitution to protect me or my property ever again.
  - brnt 6y ago
    I think you're mixing up a few things. Young democracies usually have a period in which both politicians and the people need to get used to a new way of doing things, and defining the new way of doing things. This can take a while, e.g. see the Napoleonic period and its aftermath. A nice feature about the French republic is the tradition of the reboot: they're at v5 of the Republic now, with fully revised constitutions and significantly changed shapes (parliamentary to presidential systems for instance), something many countries could learn from I think. A defacto dictatorial period is often one of the first phases of new democracies. Secondly, a problem common to quite a few eastern European countries is an unclear separation of powers (trias politica) and even unclarity about the need for it among many voters. Such an instance could (and should) be able to overrule certain kinds of fundamental changes. Some scholars describe democracies as inherent experiments, which I think is very fitting and something we need to emphasize more. Obviously trying to organize things in a cooperative, or not that cooperatively, is a ongoing affair. There is no way to guarantee anything, but the people's continued involvement. I'd hope they typically wouldn't need guns, but can use tools like constitutionals courts, and, of course the ballot box at various levels of government. Like you say, a more regionalist design can make more local autonomy possible, see Germanys states vs highly centralized French style of governing.

brnt 6y ago

Subsidiarity of responsibility/scope between layers of government seems orthogonal to the way we (s)elect people in charge. > Some things shouldn't ever be voted about. In many democracies, certain things are codified into constitutions and are hard to change, and typically not frequently, if ever, voted on. Is that what you mean?

emteycz 6y ago
Democracy is not just the way we s/elect people in charge, it's also the idea of having people in charge and having a single way of life for millions. The country where I live (Czechia) was praised for having one of the strongest constitutions ever written. Now its been destroyed by a populist government for a decade, with the destruction rate multiplied with the pandemic which this government is unable to do anything about while constantly trying to shift money into their pockets. Thanks to the pandemic they can do anything regardless of the constitution or law, but even before the pandemic we found out the constitution is worthless if there isn't anyone with the power to protect it, and that any wording (specific or broad, doesn't matter) will bend to the will of the judge. If constitution is what you rely on you're in for a bad ride, you need ordinary people with guns ready to defend it. I will not trust a constitution to protect me or my property ever again.
- brnt 6y ago
  I think you're mixing up a few things. Young democracies usually have a period in which both politicians and the people need to get used to a new way of doing things, and defining the new way of doing things. This can take a while, e.g. see the Napoleonic period and its aftermath. A nice feature about the French republic is the tradition of the reboot: they're at v5 of the Republic now, with fully revised constitutions and significantly changed shapes (parliamentary to presidential systems for instance), something many countries could learn from I think. A defacto dictatorial period is often one of the first phases of new democracies. Secondly, a problem common to quite a few eastern European countries is an unclear separation of powers (trias politica) and even unclarity about the need for it among many voters. Such an instance could (and should) be able to overrule certain kinds of fundamental changes. Some scholars describe democracies as inherent experiments, which I think is very fitting and something we need to emphasize more. Obviously trying to organize things in a cooperative, or not that cooperatively, is a ongoing affair. There is no way to guarantee anything, but the people's continued involvement. I'd hope they typically wouldn't need guns, but can use tools like constitutionals courts, and, of course the ballot box at various levels of government. Like you say, a more regionalist design can make more local autonomy possible, see Germanys states vs highly centralized French style of governing.