5 ms·
The public generally hates free trade, but free trade is in the public interest. It's one of those things. In a representative government, the public should de
by mtviewdave 13y ago
The public generally hates free trade, but free trade is in the public interest. It's one of those things.
In a representative government, the public should decide what's in the public interest.
- cwal37 13y agoWhat does the public mean? The numerical majority? The loudest segment? Policy pushed by the former could have a negative impact on minority groups, and policy pushed by the latter can be acerbic in general.
- mtviewdave 13y agoWhat does the public mean? The numerical majority? The loudest segment? Policy pushed by the former could have a negative impact on minority groups, and policy pushed by the latter can be acerbic in general. Except thaumasiotes argument is that we know what the public wants, but they shouldn't get it, because they don't know what's good for them. How to determine what the people want, and how we should structure a government to represent and implement that, is a topic we can debate endlessly. But once we have determined the will of the people (however we define that), to then say that we should disregard it because the people can't be trusted to know what's good for them, is fundamentally at odds with the entire idea of representative government in general, and American government specifically.
- topynate 13y agoThen why have representatives? You're describing direct, not representative, democracy.
- Roboprog 13y agoMaybe it's time for a hybrid form of government, then. Replace the Senate with direct democracy to ratify or reject bills and such, and use the representatives in the House as specialists to write legislation. Of course, there might be some issues with having weekly ballot referendums, but look at the mess we have now.