4 ms·

> It still seems like California's process is the least democratic. Did you mean the most democratic? California's process means the legislature can't override

> It still seems like California's process is the least democratic. Did you mean the most democratic? California's process means the legislature can't override the will of the people -- only the people can do that, through another ballot initiative. I'm not saying it's necessarily a good thing, but California ballot initiatives are about as close to direct democracy as you can get.

specialist 5y ago
> Did you mean the most democratic? Insert sound of my head imploding. Even "democracy" is ambiguous. Representative vs direct vs participatory vs ... We have to consider more than just the voting method. Power relationships, structure of discourse, processes for modification, ad nauseum. My meager best effort at divining the core essence of "democracy" is "consent of the governed". Weak sauce, I know.
MichaelZuo 5y ago
It seems like the parent has an understanding of the term quite different from the norm.
- RuggedPineapple 5y ago
  How? That's been the understanding for hundreds of years and derives farther back then even our own country. It has its roots in English constitutional law and the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty, one of the main tenets of which is that no previous act is allowed to bind the hands of a future parliament, to do so thwarts the democratic will of the people expressed by who they chose to elect.
  - MichaelZuo 5y ago
    To clarify I mean this comment ‘It still seems like California's process is the least democratic.’ Which is a bizarre way of looking at referendums, as it would imply that referendums over the entire voting population are less legitimate than bills enacted by a representative body.
asveikau 5y ago
The problem is that it's capturing what the people say is their will at a moment in time, then forcing the legislature to commit to it forever more or start a new proposition. Many people will misunderstand what the propositions propose is one issue. I feel like most California voters I have talked to say they are confusing more than anything else. And many will not turn out to vote. So who is to say that's even really the will of the people? But the issue being discussed is that the will of the people can change, but California ends up stuck with the decision for decades.
- jonas21 5y ago
  If the will of the people changes, they can pass another ballot initiative that repeals or amends the first one, using exactly the same process, with a simple majority vote. The reason California ends up stuck with some decisions for decades is that a majority of voters continue to like them or don't care enough to vote to change it.
  - asveikau 5y ago
    If it stands simply because nobody cares, can it really be said to be the will of the people? At best, it can be said to be the will at a moment in time now passed. But then there are the other issues I mentioned: many voters do not understand the propositions, many do not turn out to vote, etc. So I would even doubt that it's a valid capture at a moment in time.

specialist 5y ago

> Did you mean the most democratic? Insert sound of my head imploding. Even "democracy" is ambiguous. Representative vs direct vs participatory vs ... We have to consider more than just the voting method. Power relationships, structure of discourse, processes for modification, ad nauseum. My meager best effort at divining the core essence of "democracy" is "consent of the governed". Weak sauce, I know.

MichaelZuo 5y ago

It seems like the parent has an understanding of the term quite different from the norm.

RuggedPineapple 5y ago
How? That's been the understanding for hundreds of years and derives farther back then even our own country. It has its roots in English constitutional law and the principle of Parliamentary Sovereignty, one of the main tenets of which is that no previous act is allowed to bind the hands of a future parliament, to do so thwarts the democratic will of the people expressed by who they chose to elect.
- MichaelZuo 5y ago
  To clarify I mean this comment ‘It still seems like California's process is the least democratic.’ Which is a bizarre way of looking at referendums, as it would imply that referendums over the entire voting population are less legitimate than bills enacted by a representative body.

asveikau 5y ago

The problem is that it's capturing what the people say is their will at a moment in time, then forcing the legislature to commit to it forever more or start a new proposition. Many people will misunderstand what the propositions propose is one issue. I feel like most California voters I have talked to say they are confusing more than anything else. And many will not turn out to vote. So who is to say that's even really the will of the people? But the issue being discussed is that the will of the people can change, but California ends up stuck with the decision for decades.

jonas21 5y ago
If the will of the people changes, they can pass another ballot initiative that repeals or amends the first one, using exactly the same process, with a simple majority vote. The reason California ends up stuck with some decisions for decades is that a majority of voters continue to like them or don't care enough to vote to change it.
- asveikau 5y ago
  If it stands simply because nobody cares, can it really be said to be the will of the people? At best, it can be said to be the will at a moment in time now passed. But then there are the other issues I mentioned: many voters do not understand the propositions, many do not turn out to vote, etc. So I would even doubt that it's a valid capture at a moment in time.