3 ms·
It’s not a direct democracy. It’s a rep democracy or a republic. Idk why you fools still think this is some gotcha. It just makes you look silly. The quote work
by xcrunner529 1y ago
It’s not a direct democracy. It’s a rep democracy or a republic. Idk why you fools still think this is some gotcha. It just makes you look silly. The quote works just as well with republic it.
- Frost1x 1y agoTraditionally I agree with you (and have raised the point many times), but lately I’m not so sure if it’s a representative democracy at all. I suppose the very corrupt and wealthy are a class being represented, but a representative democracy is in theory supposed to provide representative coverage for all. That seems to be a vanishing case.
- xcrunner529 1y agoThis is true as well. Because the people (mostly) let them.
- amy214 1y agoThe issue is the representation went from 1:999 to 1:99999999999 representative ratio, so no voice is heard. It's like being in a class of 30 people vs 300,000 people. The answer is common sense abstraction, for example, I am writing this on a JVM on a docker on VM on a docker on a VM on a cloud on a VM. The use of so many layers of abstractions makes it exponentially more powerful. What we need is basically a docker for government, docker being a nobel prize tier invention because of the tremendous degrees of abstraction it permits. We return to a 1:999 ratio for a represenative, who attend a congress to vote for a virtual representative acting in a 1:999 ratio at a higher tier of congress, who themselves virtually represent a single individual at a higher tier 1:999 ratio
- xcrunner529 1y agoDid it? Has the house of rep proportion changed?
- int_19h 1y agoIt went from ~35k people per representative back in 1790 to ~750k today, so yes, we have diluted the representation of a single person by about 20x.