• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Direct democracy

Do you think it would be possible for america to have a direct democracy

  • Yes

    Votes: 5 19.2%

  • No

    Votes: 20 76.9%

  • Maybe/ I dont know

    Votes: 1 3.8%
  • Total voters
    26
J

JJB3333

Active member
Joined
Oct 25, 2013
Messages
464
Reaction score
79
Location
Colorado, U.S.A
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Do you think that it would be possible for america or any country in to days world to set up a true Direct democracy
 
It could probably be done through the internet, but it is in no way a good idea.
 
Of course it's possible. Telecommunications is a breeze. It's unlikely to happen any time soon, as we're not organised that way. Beyond that, there's no reason why not.
 
It might be technically possible, but its a very bad idea.
 
NoC_T said:
Of course it's possible. Telecommunications is a breeze. It's unlikely to happen any time soon, as we're not organised that way. Beyond that, there's no reason why not.
Click to expand...

There are plenty of reason why we shouldn't have a direct democracy.
 
Yes, it is very possible today to have a direct democracy with the internet. It would likely be a disaster as most people are not educated in law, economics, etc.
 
Your Star said:
There are plenty of reason why we shouldn't have a direct democracy.
Click to expand...
It would, in effect, require that everyone become a full time politician, so there's that. The majority wouldn't care to be burdened with the ongoing minutiae, which is why we delegate in favour of representative democracy. I'm not sure why you should balk at the prospect, but I'm certain you have your reasons.
 
Direct democracy is analogous to mob rule.
 
Possible? Yes.

Likely anytime soon? Meh. Doubtful.


Desireable? Probably not. Lots of troubles with pure majority rule.
 
Possible yes

A good idea no.

The vast majority of people do not have the time, let alone the inclination to research every decision/ vote that the government will have. Given how idiotically complex some of the bills have gotten, I doubt more then 20% even if they read the bill in its entirety would have the ability to understand what it is stating and what its legal aspects would be. Heck most politicians don't read them anymore as well (Nod to Pelosi)
 
NoC_T said:
It would, in effect, require that everyone become a full time politician, so there's that. The majority wouldn't care to be burdened with the ongoing minutiae, which is why we delegate in favour of representative democracy. I'm not sure why you should balk at the prospect, but I'm certain you have your reasons.
Click to expand...

No it wouldn't. People would not take anymore time to look at issues as they do now, with hardly any good information.
 
JJB3333 said:
Do you think that it would be possible for america or any country in to days world to set up a true Direct democracy
Click to expand...

It's never going to happen. When people have a voice it takes the power of money and influence away.
 
JJB3333 said:
Do you think that it would be possible for america or any country in to days world to set up a true Direct democracy
Click to expand...

Not in America today. True democracy would only work as long as all voters are well educated and well informed and not misinformed.
 
Direct democracy is like voting for the pretty girl on the voice.
 
Your Star said:
No it wouldn't. People would not take anymore time to look at issues as they do now, with hardly any good information.
Click to expand...
You'd be surprised what newfound interests the populace would manifest, given opportunity ad encouragement. The most cursory analysis of any society that ever stood on the brink of revolution, for example, stands as testament to the rapid and colossal development of class consciousness, for example. I had mentioned that we're not currently organised for direct democracy. Of course I'm theorising given the assumption that society has been oriented, such that education, awareness and opportunity are givens. We're a far cry from that. I only meant to suggest that there's no practical limitation. I agree that interests will differ and even fluctuate wildly at the individual level. Direct democracy will always give way to representation, in whatever proportion.

The 'mob' just happens to be the people. I don't sell them short or insult them as others do. I have every faith.
 
personally i think it would be a good idea if we involved technology. If we had it so that the people used tech to vote, we could have it so we could run the government from anywhere. and with 317 million people, yes the party's would be more expressed, but there would still be a good sized people who were non-partisan and we could get things done. And for those of you who have trouble with majority rule, you do realize that is how they currently do it right
 
Your Star said:
It could probably be done through the internet, but it is in no way a good idea.
Click to expand...
I was going to say this. The internet would actually make it easier than it's every been to do so I think. But, like you said, it is in no way a good idea. For reasons I don't even need to explain.
 
JJB3333 said:
personally i think it would be a good idea if we involved technology. If we had it so that the people used tech to vote, we could have it so we could run the government from anywhere. and with 317 million people, yes the party's would be more expressed, but there would still be a good sized people who were non-partisan and we could get things done. And for those of you who have trouble with majority rule, you do realize that is how they currently do it right
Click to expand...
Precisely. What's democracy if not a majority vote?
 
Last edited:
MarineTpartier said:
I was going to say this. The internet would actually make it easier than it's every been to do so I think. But, like you said, it is in no way a good idea. For reasons I don't even need to explain.
Click to expand...
Well I wish you would, because thus far all we've had is paranoia and the apparent desire for a minority to call the shots, which is baffling, considering Americans usually extol the virtues of 'freedom'. Would you prefer Totalitarianism?
 
JJB3333 said:
Do you think that it would be possible for america or any country in to days world to set up a true Direct democracy
Click to expand...

While technically it may be possible. It would be overrun with fraud.

No, America does not need Direct Democracy. Unrestricted Representative Democracy is already causing failure in the US. What we need is a Restricted Democracy with a good measure to qualify for Franchise and a trained, professional politicians, not career buffoons.

The best test/achievement for achieving the privilege of voting would be a demonstration of sustained selfless service. If we can't go to that, there should at least be the requirement that someone actually pays taxes, as in not get more back than they put in.
 
Your Star said:
There are plenty of reason why we shouldn't have a direct democracy.
Click to expand...
I could see why Liberals would not want direct democracy but, I agree it might not be a good idea.

Judging by the emotional, hateful and contagious stupidity of Facebook and such, we couldn't depend on rational results.
 
JJB3333 said:
Do you think that it would be possible for america or any country in to days world to set up a true Direct democracy
Click to expand...

We already have some things that are run by a true Direct Democracy - where the providers of public goods and services are chosen directly by the people, and rise or fall based solely off of whether they serve the populace on a daily basis. We call it "the free market".
 
There are too any informed decisions necessary to run a country that would be dangerous and/or threaten national security/well being that cannot be public knowledge, and the last thing we need are more people weighing on decisions when they have zero clue how things fit in the big picture.

So as others have said.. would it be possible to do? yes. Would it be possible for it to work? hell no.

edit: I just realized another thing, this would give the media WAYYY to much power and influence. They would be able to shape the malleable minds of the populace like it were a pile of pay-doh.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom