3 ms·

All these international coordination groups are somewhat questionable as they have no strong democratic controls. Imagine, for example, if all citizens of the

All these international coordination groups are somewhat questionable as they have no strong democratic controls. Imagine, for example, if all citizens of the G7 countries could vote directly by referendum on G7 policy decisions (or even on national policy decisions in the individual countries, e.g. the USA has no national referendum system, only certain individual states like California do). Representative democracy is quite the failure, as the (s)elected representatives owe their positions more to their big money donors than to the general public, and their legislative behavior aligns more with the special interests of their top donors than it does with those of the people who live in their electoral districts. Direct democracy seems far more preferable, assuming a well-educated and well-informed general public.

thx-2718 3y ago
”Direct democracy seems far more preferable, assuming a well-educated and well-informed general public. " I'm all for adopting Switzerland style governance. AFAIK they've seem able to run things rather well.
sgift 3y ago
> Representative democracy is quite the failure, as the (s)elected representatives owe their positions more to their big money donors than to the general public, and their legislative behavior aligns more with the special interests of their top donors than it does with those of the people who live in their electoral districts. And yet they get voted in again and again. I'm sure the next answer is that this happens due to propaganda, which brings up the question how a direct democracy isn't even more at risk of manipulation.
- avgcorrection 3y ago
  > And yet they get voted in again and again. Yeah when you have a two-party system (in the case of America) and you have two business parties, people only vote for the reactionary lackeys of business and the gay-friendly lackeys of business. It’s such a conundrum. What happens is that the “establishment” candidates get all the press/propaganda while the other candidates either (1) belong to third parties which risks “wasting” a vote, and/or (2) either stay completely fringe/off everyone’s radar or get smeared by the establishment candidates. And propaganda is everywhere. It’s not just “this message has been approved by” commercials. My comment could be astroturfed. (It’s not though. My political brain is just programmed in a weird way, (kind of) organically.) How are you supposed to counter that as a citizen? Vote for the candidate that you least know as a kind of bypass-the-system trick?
avgcorrection 3y ago
“Democracy” in IR-speak is just a self-congratulating title that regular people and the elites alike think sound good and noble in theory. But out of the two words in “liberal democracy”, only the former matters to the elite; the latter is just the pretty mask put on capitalism. > Direct democracy seems far more preferable, assuming a well-educated and well-informed general public. The meme that never dies. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36086819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36086819

thx-2718 3y ago

”Direct democracy seems far more preferable, assuming a well-educated and well-informed general public. " I'm all for adopting Switzerland style governance. AFAIK they've seem able to run things rather well.

sgift 3y ago

> Representative democracy is quite the failure, as the (s)elected representatives owe their positions more to their big money donors than to the general public, and their legislative behavior aligns more with the special interests of their top donors than it does with those of the people who live in their electoral districts. And yet they get voted in again and again. I'm sure the next answer is that this happens due to propaganda, which brings up the question how a direct democracy isn't even more at risk of manipulation.

avgcorrection 3y ago
> And yet they get voted in again and again. Yeah when you have a two-party system (in the case of America) and you have two business parties, people only vote for the reactionary lackeys of business and the gay-friendly lackeys of business. It’s such a conundrum. What happens is that the “establishment” candidates get all the press/propaganda while the other candidates either (1) belong to third parties which risks “wasting” a vote, and/or (2) either stay completely fringe/off everyone’s radar or get smeared by the establishment candidates. And propaganda is everywhere. It’s not just “this message has been approved by” commercials. My comment could be astroturfed. (It’s not though. My political brain is just programmed in a weird way, (kind of) organically.) How are you supposed to counter that as a citizen? Vote for the candidate that you least know as a kind of bypass-the-system trick?

avgcorrection 3y ago

“Democracy” in IR-speak is just a self-congratulating title that regular people and the elites alike think sound good and noble in theory. But out of the two words in “liberal democracy”, only the former matters to the elite; the latter is just the pretty mask put on capitalism. > Direct democracy seems far more preferable, assuming a well-educated and well-informed general public. The meme that never dies. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36086819 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=36086819