4 ms·

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

by herbst 5y ago

loriverkutya 5y ago
Can you please be sensible? Direct demoracy is not working with 445 million people.
- bondarchuk 5y ago
  Mathematically it's not more difficult to determine the majority vote among 400 million people, than among 10 million. What would prevent it from working for you?
  - tchalla 5y ago
    > it's not more difficult to determine the majority vote among 400 million people Democracy is not majority voting.
    - thegrimmest 5y ago
      "a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives." Basically it is. You don't need representatives to be democratic.
- herbst 5y ago
  Yes? Any data for that?
  - loriverkutya 5y ago
    No direct democracy existed in known history with 445 million people.
- effie 5y ago
  It could work, just do referendum in every country and then implement the result. It would require that people in power in all countries wanted to give power to their people, and implemented it securely. Which is why it won't happen.
- lwn 5y ago
  In my opinion it's impossible for a small group of people/ politicians to determine what's good for 445 million people.
toxik 5y ago
Direct democracy is not a panacea. In fact, it can be quite the opposite. Fair and effective governance is a very difficult thing to achieve, tending either to be subvertible, or totalitarian.
- herbst 5y ago
  Not saying that is not true. Yet living in one of the few direct democracies it is the very best we have in terms of democracy. On a bigger scale liquid democracy may is more interesting. Edit:// the EU or even the US has shown multiple times that it will act against the majority of they can.
- bondarchuk 5y ago
  I think representative democracy specifically does not work to stave off totalitarianism. When the issue under consideration is about increasing the power of politicians over the citizenry, many politicians will switch from voting as representatives of citizens, to voting as politicians. A binding referendum that can only retract proposed laws, like we have/had/will have (sorry, I don't know exactly) in NL, seems like it could largely solve this issue, provided it gets sufficient traction.
- tacocataco 5y ago
  Direct democracy is best when the amount of people voting stays small. Think local government.
- t0bia_s 5y ago
  Democracy cannot work without free acces to information. However, most people wont care about it. Especially nowadays when public opinions are shaped by social networks with censorship and sensations. We can implement all kind of ideologies on masses very fast. So direct democracy could be more dangerous than you can imagine.
WastingMyTime89 5y ago
> far from a direct democracy. And? Direct democracies are far worth than representative democracies in practically everyway. The Covid crisis should have made clear to all that people are not policies experts. Given than no country in the UE significantly uses direct democracy (referendums are pretty much never used and always devolve into a ridiculous race to who can say the most outrageous thing in front of the media), I don't see how that can be leveraged against the institution.
- herbst 5y ago
  You realize that Switzerland hasen't voted to wear masks and get restrictions? Having a direct democracy does not mean the gov can't make their own decisions at times.
  - WastingMyTime89 5y ago
    Yes, I do realize Switzerland doesn't actually use direct democracy for things that matter and when they do they often end up with xenophobic laws. I don't even want to talk about town assemblies voting on naturalisation decisions.
    - hhlbf 5y ago
      So if they want to be xenophobic, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it.
      - MauranKilom 5y ago
        "So if they want to kill all the Jews, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it." Creating laws based on popularity makes populism rule. Hence why democracy usually has an explicit legislative branch abstracting over individual sentiments. That helps prevent policy from being devised through an overly greedy algorithm. That is not to say it prevents all these problems. But it evidently helps.

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

by herbst 5y ago

It's still no and far from a direct democracy.

loriverkutya 5y ago

Can you please be sensible? Direct demoracy is not working with 445 million people.

bondarchuk 5y ago
Mathematically it's not more difficult to determine the majority vote among 400 million people, than among 10 million. What would prevent it from working for you?
- tchalla 5y ago
  > it's not more difficult to determine the majority vote among 400 million people Democracy is not majority voting.
  - thegrimmest 5y ago
    "a system of government by the whole population or all the eligible members of a state, typically through elected representatives." Basically it is. You don't need representatives to be democratic.
herbst 5y ago
Yes? Any data for that?
- loriverkutya 5y ago
  No direct democracy existed in known history with 445 million people.
effie 5y ago
It could work, just do referendum in every country and then implement the result. It would require that people in power in all countries wanted to give power to their people, and implemented it securely. Which is why it won't happen.
lwn 5y ago
In my opinion it's impossible for a small group of people/ politicians to determine what's good for 445 million people.

toxik 5y ago

Direct democracy is not a panacea. In fact, it can be quite the opposite. Fair and effective governance is a very difficult thing to achieve, tending either to be subvertible, or totalitarian.

herbst 5y ago
Not saying that is not true. Yet living in one of the few direct democracies it is the very best we have in terms of democracy. On a bigger scale liquid democracy may is more interesting. Edit:// the EU or even the US has shown multiple times that it will act against the majority of they can.
bondarchuk 5y ago
I think representative democracy specifically does not work to stave off totalitarianism. When the issue under consideration is about increasing the power of politicians over the citizenry, many politicians will switch from voting as representatives of citizens, to voting as politicians. A binding referendum that can only retract proposed laws, like we have/had/will have (sorry, I don't know exactly) in NL, seems like it could largely solve this issue, provided it gets sufficient traction.
tacocataco 5y ago
Direct democracy is best when the amount of people voting stays small. Think local government.
t0bia_s 5y ago
Democracy cannot work without free acces to information. However, most people wont care about it. Especially nowadays when public opinions are shaped by social networks with censorship and sensations. We can implement all kind of ideologies on masses very fast. So direct democracy could be more dangerous than you can imagine.

WastingMyTime89 5y ago

> far from a direct democracy. And? Direct democracies are far worth than representative democracies in practically everyway. The Covid crisis should have made clear to all that people are not policies experts. Given than no country in the UE significantly uses direct democracy (referendums are pretty much never used and always devolve into a ridiculous race to who can say the most outrageous thing in front of the media), I don't see how that can be leveraged against the institution.

herbst 5y ago
You realize that Switzerland hasen't voted to wear masks and get restrictions? Having a direct democracy does not mean the gov can't make their own decisions at times.
- WastingMyTime89 5y ago
  Yes, I do realize Switzerland doesn't actually use direct democracy for things that matter and when they do they often end up with xenophobic laws. I don't even want to talk about town assemblies voting on naturalisation decisions.
  - hhlbf 5y ago
    So if they want to be xenophobic, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it.
    - MauranKilom 5y ago
      "So if they want to kill all the Jews, what's the problem? It's their country and they can do whatever they want with it." Creating laws based on popularity makes populism rule. Hence why democracy usually has an explicit legislative branch abstracting over individual sentiments. That helps prevent policy from being devised through an overly greedy algorithm. That is not to say it prevents all these problems. But it evidently helps.