4 ms·

These sound like the exact reasons we don't have a direct democracy. “A democracy will continue to exist up until the time voters discover that they can vote t

by bpt3 1y ago

These sound like the exact reasons we don't have a direct democracy. “A democracy will continue to exist up until the time voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts from the public treasury.” - not Peter Thiel

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
_Algernon_ 1y ago
That's exactly how it works already, albeit through the middlemen representatives figuring out what block of voters is cheapest to buy. The only meaningful difference in a representative democracy is that the representatives can choose not to deliver on their promises (in other words: lie), thereby consolidating real power in a smaller group of people.
- hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
  Except somehow it's the opposite? The Big Beautiful Bill is one of the most regressive bills in decades - the vast majority of the benefits went to the richest while the biggest cuts went to the poorest. The MAGA base is definitely not on the richer end of that spectrum. I.e. they didn't really even get anything for their undying loyalty besides "owning the libs" I guess.
- schmidtleonard 1y ago
  The market already exponentially concentrates wealth, just piggy back on that. There will always be a market for promoting the self-serving politics of the rich.
- bpt3 1y ago
  The idea is that smaller group of people actually have some integrity and sense of duty to the people they represent and the country at large, rather than just pulling the lever for the thing that benefits them the most in the immediate term. That idea has always been tested, with the current times being the largest test in several decades at least.
  - _Algernon_ 1y ago
    The argument that somebody else has better integrity and sense of duty representing my needs or wants is dead on arrival. Direct democracy is a representative democracy where each person has a representative.
    - bpt3 1y ago
      The founding fathers and many others would disagree. Based on human history, your assessment of the average human's level of integrity and reasoning is irrationally optimistic. Also, I assume you meant to say "Direct democracy is a representative democracy where each person *is* a representative."
      - _Algernon_ 1y ago
        It doesn't matter because everyone only has to represent themselves so they don't really need to have integrity or ability to reason in some larger sense, they just have to be selfish — which is a lot easier than reasoning your way to what maximizes societal good, or some average of the opinions of the 100'000+ people you are supposedly representing. And the amount of power an individual has is negligible so a bad vote is diluted much more than it is in a representative democracy.
        bpt3 1y ago
        You realize that a certain "institution" would have died out much slower (if at all) in the US if what you said was accurate? I think that's the only example needed to prove that direct democracy is not a desirable form of government, let alone the ideal.
js8 1y ago
It's a nice soundbite, but in reality people (maybe not Peter Thiel though) understand the value of the common goods quite well. (If you happen to be an uneducated American, who doesn't, you can come here to Europe and see.)
- bpt3 1y ago
  [flagged]
username135 1y ago
Its always projection with megalomaniacs
- cindyllm 1y ago
  [dead]
palmfacehn 1y ago
Tyranny of the majority redux. I find it illustrative that so many here defend Democracy as an ends to be achieved or an unqualified good unto itself, rather than a process or a means to an end. It illustrates the arguments made elsewhere about how democratic processes and institutions have been succeeded by Democracy, the belief. As an unqualified good, one can simply claim that the majority has voted or that the Democratic process has been performed, and therefore the outcome is just. There's an apt George Carlin quote... https://www.google.com/search?q=Democracy%3A+The+God+That+Failed https://www.google.com/search?q=Democracy%3A+The+God+That+Fa... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qByWF30jKiw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qByWF30jKiw
- bpt3 1y ago
  Hoppe is far too extreme for my tastes and did not seem too interested in rigorously supporting his (distasteful to put it mildly) preconceived notions, but yes direct democracy is undesirable for a number of reasons IMO. See Squid Game as a more recent commentary.
  - palmfacehn 1y ago
    His arguments around the time preferences and incentives of elected officials seem relevant to the discussion.

by bpt3 1y ago

deleted 1y ago

[deleted]

_Algernon_ 1y ago

That's exactly how it works already, albeit through the middlemen representatives figuring out what block of voters is cheapest to buy. The only meaningful difference in a representative democracy is that the representatives can choose not to deliver on their promises (in other words: lie), thereby consolidating real power in a smaller group of people.

hn_throwaway_99 1y ago
Except somehow it's the opposite? The Big Beautiful Bill is one of the most regressive bills in decades - the vast majority of the benefits went to the richest while the biggest cuts went to the poorest. The MAGA base is definitely not on the richer end of that spectrum. I.e. they didn't really even get anything for their undying loyalty besides "owning the libs" I guess.
schmidtleonard 1y ago
The market already exponentially concentrates wealth, just piggy back on that. There will always be a market for promoting the self-serving politics of the rich.
bpt3 1y ago
The idea is that smaller group of people actually have some integrity and sense of duty to the people they represent and the country at large, rather than just pulling the lever for the thing that benefits them the most in the immediate term. That idea has always been tested, with the current times being the largest test in several decades at least.
- _Algernon_ 1y ago
  The argument that somebody else has better integrity and sense of duty representing my needs or wants is dead on arrival. Direct democracy is a representative democracy where each person has a representative.
  - bpt3 1y ago
    The founding fathers and many others would disagree. Based on human history, your assessment of the average human's level of integrity and reasoning is irrationally optimistic. Also, I assume you meant to say "Direct democracy is a representative democracy where each person *is* a representative."
    - _Algernon_ 1y ago
      It doesn't matter because everyone only has to represent themselves so they don't really need to have integrity or ability to reason in some larger sense, they just have to be selfish — which is a lot easier than reasoning your way to what maximizes societal good, or some average of the opinions of the 100'000+ people you are supposedly representing. And the amount of power an individual has is negligible so a bad vote is diluted much more than it is in a representative democracy.
      - bpt3 1y ago
        You realize that a certain "institution" would have died out much slower (if at all) in the US if what you said was accurate? I think that's the only example needed to prove that direct democracy is not a desirable form of government, let alone the ideal.

js8 1y ago

It's a nice soundbite, but in reality people (maybe not Peter Thiel though) understand the value of the common goods quite well. (If you happen to be an uneducated American, who doesn't, you can come here to Europe and see.)

bpt3 1y ago
[flagged]

username135 1y ago

Its always projection with megalomaniacs

cindyllm 1y ago
[dead]

palmfacehn 1y ago

Tyranny of the majority redux. I find it illustrative that so many here defend Democracy as an ends to be achieved or an unqualified good unto itself, rather than a process or a means to an end. It illustrates the arguments made elsewhere about how democratic processes and institutions have been succeeded by Democracy, the belief. As an unqualified good, one can simply claim that the majority has voted or that the Democratic process has been performed, and therefore the outcome is just. There's an apt George Carlin quote... https://www.google.com/search?q=Democracy%3A+The+God+That+Failed https://www.google.com/search?q=Democracy%3A+The+God+That+Fa... https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qByWF30jKiw https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qByWF30jKiw

bpt3 1y ago
Hoppe is far too extreme for my tastes and did not seem too interested in rigorously supporting his (distasteful to put it mildly) preconceived notions, but yes direct democracy is undesirable for a number of reasons IMO. See Squid Game as a more recent commentary.
- palmfacehn 1y ago
  His arguments around the time preferences and incentives of elected officials seem relevant to the discussion.