2006-07-01 05:27:26 · 7 answers · asked by simpleton 1 in Politics & Government ➔ Civic Participation
The present merely representative democracy makes people helpless between elections. People do not rule but are slaves once elections are over. Giving people structures for ongoing democracy in terms, say of, neighbourhood parliaments and their multitier federations could ensure more answerability. Neighbourhood Community Network has been advocating such a federation even at upto global level saying that it could help for world peace, justice and corruption-free government. Some others too have been talking of such direct democracy. But quite a lot of people are yet to positively take step in favour of it. Why are they afraid?
2006-07-01 05:45:02 · update #1
Because of the choices of the unwashed, uneducated masses...
That's it in a nutshell. Being one of the (sometimes unwashed, and not educated quite enough) masses... I recognize those who regal themselves with the notion they are better equipped to rule with "Benevolent Monarchy" really aren't correct.
Wouldn't it be something to see direct democracy in action?
2006-07-01 05:45:25 · answer #1 · answered by gapeach7355 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
As trinitythought said, it is mob rule. When James Madison mentions the so-called "tyranny of the majority" he is in fact talking about how the masses can be manipulated "passions."
Obviously this sounds very elitist and certainly it is (but truthful as well). The opposite would be the tyranny of the minority in which an oligarchy will take control of the state, and not paying attention to the will of the majority.
Then representative democracy fits better. In theory we will have level-headed representatives (the cream rises to the top) who will represent but not necessarily follow the will of the "passions of the majority" nor the special interests of a powerful minority. It would work nicely if it wasn't for the fact that the passionate majority is still passionate and the powerful minority is still powerful. When 40% of the country votes in Congressional elections certainly the passionate majority is not having a say. Instead is the minority (special interests) regardless of political orientation that are financing campaigns and electing hacks to public office.
2006-07-01 13:36:59 · answer #2 · answered by Raul Vazquez 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because direct democracy is mob rule, and mob can be easily manipulated. One of the other answerer's had it right, direct democracy does work is a very small setting where everyone has a chance to give their opinion, but is completely worthless on any scale larger than 100 or so people.
2006-07-01 12:57:59 · answer #3 · answered by trinitytough 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
My argument is.
20 of us are crossing a bridge and we are operating as a democracy. one person calls for a vote as to who wants to jump to our death off the bridge.
We have a vote and 11 vote to jump. In a true democracy all 20 would have to jump. It doesn't work as well as what we have now.
2006-07-01 18:35:00 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Man, you think minorities have it rough now...imagine if we had a totally "majority rule" democracy.
2006-07-01 14:41:43 · answer #5 · answered by kelly24592 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
It works fine in a small group, ie. classroom, etc. It is a bit unwieldy with 300 million people.
2006-07-01 12:32:29 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
The majority of people are too stupid to know what is good for them.
2006-07-01 18:02:26 · answer #7 · answered by bumpocooper 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋