RE: Direct Democracy?
May 21, 2015 at 12:50 pm
(This post was last modified: May 21, 2015 at 1:49 pm by nihilistcat.)
All great responses. I just have a few points I'd like to add.
I had mentioned direct voting on issues at the "local" level, more referendum voting at the municipal and state level, and the ability to hold recall elections across the board (including congress), I suppose you can call this direct democracy light (or really a representative system with some aspects of direct democracy blended in to create a hybrid). Also, introducing aspects of direct democracy into our political system would not abrogate our Constitution.
So I wasn't exactly proposing an Athenian style democracy where absolutely all decisions are made by direct democratic voting in a modern version of the Agora. In fact, many of the ideas I mentioned are in practice today in some US jurisdictions (for instance, Colorado grants the right to hold recall elections, including for members of congress, we're all aware of California's referendum voting system, etc.).
BTW some historians would agree with the consensus on this board e.g. Athens was extremely militant and went to war often (many attribute this to the makeup of their political system). But of course Rome was even more militant, arguably the United States is a militant society, so I'm not sure if direct democracy enhances this propensity?
But also consider, a representative democracy doesn't necessarily provide any greater protection against the sort of outcomes some of you have postulated. For instance, take the recent example of Egypt. When Mubarak was overthrown, Egyptians voted the Muslim Brotherhood into power, and Egypt is a representative democracy (albeit a fledgling democracy). So this nightmare outcome can happen under a representative system.
I had mentioned direct voting on issues at the "local" level, more referendum voting at the municipal and state level, and the ability to hold recall elections across the board (including congress), I suppose you can call this direct democracy light (or really a representative system with some aspects of direct democracy blended in to create a hybrid). Also, introducing aspects of direct democracy into our political system would not abrogate our Constitution.
So I wasn't exactly proposing an Athenian style democracy where absolutely all decisions are made by direct democratic voting in a modern version of the Agora. In fact, many of the ideas I mentioned are in practice today in some US jurisdictions (for instance, Colorado grants the right to hold recall elections, including for members of congress, we're all aware of California's referendum voting system, etc.).
BTW some historians would agree with the consensus on this board e.g. Athens was extremely militant and went to war often (many attribute this to the makeup of their political system). But of course Rome was even more militant, arguably the United States is a militant society, so I'm not sure if direct democracy enhances this propensity?
But also consider, a representative democracy doesn't necessarily provide any greater protection against the sort of outcomes some of you have postulated. For instance, take the recent example of Egypt. When Mubarak was overthrown, Egyptians voted the Muslim Brotherhood into power, and Egypt is a representative democracy (albeit a fledgling democracy). So this nightmare outcome can happen under a representative system.
