Active Democracy vs Representative Democracy

[Horsefish]

I doubt theres another quote of mine which is that entertaining or intresting.

That's what I thought but I've been sigged a few times now. I guess the trick is to spam the shit out of everything and hope for the best

I think I've got one fo yours. Though your spam count is about 7000 posts above mine

[Whiskey Hill]

Active locally, representative at any larger scale.

[The Reichstag Of Italy]

active

[The Murtunian Tribes]

personally,I think active dem is better because it really gives peoples complete voting power over reforms or other decisions, but i would like to know the opinions of other users here.

How is that better?

[Lucatopia]

Active democracy is better than representative democracy. And those who say voters are too dumb to make far-reaching decisions should rethink their attitude towards representative democracy. After all it's your dumb voters who elect the representatives. Thus, the best government would be a dictatorship. Which is, of course, hilarious.

[Risottia]

personally,I think active dem is better because it really gives peoples complete voting power over reforms or other decisions,but i would like to know the opinions of other users here. ps: if somrone doesn't know,active is the voting directly by the population trough referendums

I thought that was called "direct" democracy.

Anyway no, absolute direct democracy doesn't work. Except, maybe, for extremely small-scale communities - but even there some decisions can't be reduced to simple yes/no questions.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

Active democracy is better than representative democracy. And those who say voters are too dumb to make far-reaching decisions should rethink their attitude towards representative democracy. After all it's your dumb voters who elect the representatives. Thus, the best government would be a dictatorship. Which is, of course, hilarious.

No. Just because voters are stupid does not mean that democracy is automatically worse than dictatorship.

[Yuktova]

I like this idea of "Direct Democracy", where the people vote on all laws, leaders, and wars. Too bad the USA does not adapt this policy, although they like making the CEOs and companies only have any real say.

I hate Representative Democracy, though. Makes me puke in my mouth if someone actually likes it.

If someone could mix Anarchy with a Direct Democracy as another option of government, I would love them.

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I like this idea of "Direct Democracy", where the people vote on all laws, leaders, and wars. Too bad the USA does not adapt this policy, although they like making the CEOs and companies only have any real say.

I hate Representative Democracy, though. Makes me puke in my mouth if someone actually likes it.

You honestly think the USA could actually come to consensus on issues? It would probably rip this country to little tiny bite-sized pieces.

[Nova Tograna]

Doesn't this have to do with what you believe is the purpose of democracy.

I've always thought democracy as a means to an end not the end itself, the end being a stable and accountable system of governance, as Churchill put it "Democracy is the worst form of government, except for all those other forms that have been tried from time to time." So democracy isn't about some divine right to determine one's own fate, consequences be damned, its about the fact that, in the long run, it creates the best system for a vibrant and dynamic yet stable and secure society. On that basis wails of "direct democracy is best because it's our right" fall rather flat

[New Glennland]

Representative democracy without strong party discipline is prone to rampant corruption while direct democracy is subject to the foolishness of the emotionally charged mob mentality of the day. Neither one is good, but a hybrid of the two is best, such as the arrangement in Florida, where we have our highly corrupt legislature alongside citizen lawmaking in the form of public initiatives (amendments placed on the ballot by the gathering of petitions). Initiatives and referenda are good only if the electorate is educated and informed, which is not always the case. Also, business interests can sway the public by misleading them with well-financed media campaigns to scare the public into giving them the outcome they want. Both representative and direct democracy are far from perfect, and a combination of the two is far from perfect (just as with any other human endeavor), but the combination of the two is the best alternative.

[Georgism]

That's what I thought but I've been sigged a few times now. I guess the trick is to spam the shit out of everything and hope for the best

I think I've got one fo yours. Though your spam count is about 7000 posts above mine

Aye. This nation is being retired after 10001 posts though

[Horsefish]

I think I've got one fo yours. Though your spam count is about 7000 posts above mine

Aye. This nation is being retired after 10001 posts though

But then who will sig my post?

I'll also have to alter my new factbook too.

[The Planet Carpathia]

Representative is the only sensible form of democracy to use (though that does depend rather on how you select the representatives). Direct democracy can only work on an extremely small scale, or decision making just becomes a total mess, and how exactly you get together tens of millions of people (or even hundreds of millions) to make a decision that can't necesarily be dumbed down to a yes/no decision is beyond my comprehension.

That's not to say I don't support more citizen involvement in representative democracy. I strongly support a right to recall representatives, for example.

[Keronians]

Active democracy = chaos.

[Moral Libertarians]

Active democracy = chaos.

Basically ^this.

[Flaming Soul Forces]

I know that democracy has dictated very stupid ideas, particularly during times of stress like war or depression, but I have the feeling that allowing people more direct democracy would make it easier to repeal such stupid ideas when times of stress end. Assuming repeal is made easier than passing laws. Perhaps through judicial review along with a declaration of basic rights that can't be infringed upon. One that is difficult to amend or replace.

Of course, this would also mean that people who have more time on their hands (Such as due to wealth or retirement) might become more influential for simply voting more, but that is also true with a representative form as such people can run for office disproportionately.

Just because there is more direct democracy doesn't mean you can't establish committees to study issues and policies more in depth. This would be a similar function as politicians in committees in a representative form, but possibly much larger.

Using a decentralized system like Switzerland's would probably be necessary to avoid a majority's oppression. I would consider moving to Switzerland just for its political organization if wasn't so difficult to get naturalized and such.

this

[Flaming Soul Forces]

I like this idea of "Direct Democracy", where the people vote on all laws, leaders, and wars. Too bad the USA does not adapt this policy, although they like making the CEOs and companies only have any real say.

I hate Representative Democracy, though. Makes me puke in my mouth if someone actually likes it.

If someone could mix Anarchy with a Direct Democracy as another option of government, I would love them.

Anarcho-communism is based on direct democracy

[The Murtunian Tribes]

I like this idea of "Direct Democracy", where the people vote on all laws, leaders, and wars. Too bad the USA does not adapt this policy, although they like making the CEOs and companies only have any real say.

I hate Representative Democracy, though. Makes me puke in my mouth if someone actually likes it.

If someone could mix Anarchy with a Direct Democracy as another option of government, I would love them.

Anarcho-communism is based on direct democracy

A lot of anarchist philosophies are. Which is why they're also ridiculous.

[Charlotte Ryberg]

Just for fun, I think my country could be run by netizens. The problem is, direct democracy is quite a challenge to manage, but not impossible.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

personally,I think active dem is better because it really gives peoples complete voting power over reforms or other decisions,but i would like to know the opinions of other users here.

ps: if somrone doesn't know,active is the voting directly by the population trough referendums and representative is the voting done by representants elected by the population Aka Parliament

Neither works. But active democracy is the worse, because the populace often doesn't know what they're talking about.
See: military funding.
See: nuclear power.

[Georgism]

Just for fun, I think my country could be run by netizens. The problem is, direct democracy is quite a challenge to manage, but not impossible.

I had a country where the people in F&NI voted on what option I should select for each issue. It became effort to do though.

If you were actually being serious about wanting to try a nation with this then I can give you the password...

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Just for fun, I think my country could be run by netizens. The problem is, direct democracy is quite a challenge to manage, but not impossible.

I had a country where the people in F&NI voted on what option I should select for each issue. It became effort to do though.

If you were actually being serious about wanting to try a nation with this then I can give you the password...

I think I saw that actually, but never voted.

The thing is, that's done IRL in England, sort of - there's a farm where they actually vote online on how to run it, down to what to have as crops and livestock.

[Georgism]

The thing is, that's done IRL in England, sort of - there's a farm where they actually vote online on how to run it, down to what to have as crops and livestock.

Really? Link?

Also I'm guessing that the voting is mainly done by farm enthusiasts or something? Which would be okay if applied to IRL politics - political enthusiasts vote on politics, economics enthusiasts on economic matters, etc. That wouldn't really happen though

[City 9]

I prefer representative democracy. The will of the people is often contradictory due to the extremely short term way that voters tend to analyse policy decisions. Ask a voter if they want to pay less taxes and receive more government services and most of the time they will say yes. Ask them if they want their country to plunge into a sovereign debt crisis or hyperinflation and they'll always say no.

this.