3 ms·

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 diff

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.

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.