5 ms·

I can give the evidence. In Switzerland, it took very long time to enact laws for protection of minorities. Progressive politicians in other countries enacted t

I can give the evidence. In Switzerland, it took very long time to enact laws for protection of minorities. Progressive politicians in other countries enacted these much sooner. It's also empirically true that direct democracies tend to save on government budget, as opposed to politicians, who are usually interested in giving money away (often to useful pet projects). So what's your evidence for the opposite claim? I want hard evidence, not "imagining things". I don't consider "Ancient Greek" system to be democratic. In particular, you cannot restrict other people from voting democratically, then it's not a democracy (that would be type of Russell's paradox). I also think that "Greek" theory of government cycles is bullshit. (Almost any theory that has "cycle" in name is bullshit, for what is it worth.) Historically, there have probably been more failures of representative democracies than of direct democracies. I do however consider representative democracy to be a form of democracy. (There are 3 basic implementations of the democratic principles - direct voting, representation and random drawing, each having advantages and disadvantages for different things.)

jacques_chester 13y ago
> So what's your evidence for the opposite claim? I want hard evidence, not "imagining things". Probably the most famous example was Socrates being directed to die because he asked annoying questions.
- asgard1024 13y ago
  Annoying to whom? The problem with that example is that we don't have, I believe, enough information to really tell what happened. I am not sure, for example, if the "voting" on that matter would really pass the scrutiny. Maybe you could provide a 19th or 20th century example, if those things are so common?
  - jacques_chester 13y ago
    Off the top of my head, I can't think of a true national direct democracy in the modern age. Pretty much all of them eyeballed the ancient greek example and decided to stick to representative democracy. About the closest you get is citizen-initiated referenda. The experience is mixed. Some people reckon it's wonderful in Switzerland. Meanwhile in California, the state budget is unfixable because of previous CIRs.
    - asgard1024 13y ago
      Or maybe they decided to stick with it because it advances their own interest. How very convenient, to teach Ivy League graduates that Ancient Greece can be generalized but modern Switzerland or Iceland (or many U.S. States) are isolated, culturally unique, examples. :-) I haven't read a very good analysis of California yet. What I read about it looks like they got into the trouble because they have both representative and direct systems kind of checkmating each other. Would they prefer strictly one system over another, it wouldn't have happened. There are couple of other U.S. States with similar provisions for semi-direct democracy (which is actually a model I prefer, like in Switzerland), and they don't seem to have quite the same problems as California.

jacques_chester 13y ago

> So what's your evidence for the opposite claim? I want hard evidence, not "imagining things". Probably the most famous example was Socrates being directed to die because he asked annoying questions.

asgard1024 13y ago
Annoying to whom? The problem with that example is that we don't have, I believe, enough information to really tell what happened. I am not sure, for example, if the "voting" on that matter would really pass the scrutiny. Maybe you could provide a 19th or 20th century example, if those things are so common?
- jacques_chester 13y ago
  Off the top of my head, I can't think of a true national direct democracy in the modern age. Pretty much all of them eyeballed the ancient greek example and decided to stick to representative democracy. About the closest you get is citizen-initiated referenda. The experience is mixed. Some people reckon it's wonderful in Switzerland. Meanwhile in California, the state budget is unfixable because of previous CIRs.
  - asgard1024 13y ago
    Or maybe they decided to stick with it because it advances their own interest. How very convenient, to teach Ivy League graduates that Ancient Greece can be generalized but modern Switzerland or Iceland (or many U.S. States) are isolated, culturally unique, examples. :-) I haven't read a very good analysis of California yet. What I read about it looks like they got into the trouble because they have both representative and direct systems kind of checkmating each other. Would they prefer strictly one system over another, it wouldn't have happened. There are couple of other U.S. States with similar provisions for semi-direct democracy (which is actually a model I prefer, like in Switzerland), and they don't seem to have quite the same problems as California.