>The point of electing a representative government is to have a group of people whose daily lives are focused on the task of running the government. People outs

>The point of electing a representative government is to have a group of people whose daily lives are focused on the task of running the government. People outside of the government only have so much time to think about legislation, even when it's really important. This is post-facto rationalization for why the government operates the way it does. Most governments transitioned from a dictatorship to representative democracy because the masses reached breaking point over a particular issue and demanded greater power, together. Representative democracy exists due to the compromise that was brooked at these points between the ruling classes and the ruled. If anything, it exists as a sop by the ruling classes, who from the very beginning tried to exclude people from voting as they introduced it (only property owners, no blacks, no slaves, no peasants, etc.) Direct democracy is in no way incompatible with the idea that "we don't have enough time to think about legislation", provided you are given the option to delegate your votes to somebody whom you trust who does have time. Any sensible system would do this and let you revoke or move your delegation at any time on any topic. And no, that is not just representative democracy reinvented. I would delegate most of my votes in a direct democracy to my retired parents.