What is wrong with direct democracy if it works in the way demonstrated at http://www.1party4all.co.uk?

Question

This opinion-polling website, which promotes the big new idea of direct democracy with a perfectly balanced "constitution", questions the merits of indiscriminate universal suffrage and proposes that only taxpayers should be allowed to vote and that those who pay more tax should have more votes, similiar to voting rights that shareholders in a company would have.

The secret ballot would be abolished and a Register of Voters published, with their votes and voting history a matter of public knowledge, to prevent abuse.

Of course, it is new, radical and revolutionary!

Would you support a party that runs along the lines of www.1party4all.co.uk? It asks moral questions and proposes practical courses of action, such as whether to lower taxes, not engage in pointless wars, perfectly combining moral philosophy with practical politics.

Direct democracy is the only means fringe parties can unite against our 2-party oligarchy with indistinguishable policies! Do you agree?

Answer 1

I like democracy. I believe in democracy. I also see the website pertains to the UK. I happen to be American, but still feel I can interject something here. Unchecked democracy becomes little more than tyranny of the majority or sense voting privileges are weighted towards the largest tax payers (the rich)... tyranny of the wealthy. In America the wealthiest socioeconomic members tend to be white (I'm white and in one of the higher brackets to be clear), while the poorest tend to be minority. America also has a poor history regarding race relations. Racial integration was forced on certain regions of American, it was a concept that was not popular with a majority of individuals in key areas of the country. A reinterpretation of the constitution deemed "Every man is created equal" did not necessarily infer the terms white and male. The point I'm making is the majority opinion may not always lead your country in the most honorable of directions. A majority opinion will always exist irregardless of the issue at hand and it is only right that the country's overall principles reflect the principles that the majority hold. A minority view point shouldn't supercede the interests of the majority, but the majority shouldn't be able to subjugate the minority to it's every whim as well. Safe guards are needed to check and balance the power of the ruling majority. My country is a prime example of what can happen when the balance of power becomes weighted to one side.

Answer 2

I think it's a bad idea.

First of all, secret ballot voting prevents reprisals and corruption. Second, the more you pay in taxes the more votes you get only allows the richest in the population to vote and therefore influence the political process. That's open for corruption.

Where does direct democracy stop? Do the people vote on foreign policies? Does the government have to open up everything to include state secrets so that we can decide?

That's dangerous and absolutely idiotic. I can't imagine allowing a vast majority of the people who post on this forum the opportunity to know state secrets and vote on foreign policy. Hell, I don't like the fact that Nancy Pelosi has some kind of say....

Answer 3

probable no longer. this would be a concern while it got here right down to worldwide international kinfolk, coping with the protection tension and overseeing the government end of the government. even with the undeniable fact that, i will see removing the Legislative branch of the US government, leaving the Judicial and government branches in place and permitting a technique for man or woman electorate to propose regulations, and be voted upon by using the human beings. The President would then nevertheless have a veto splendid in case human beings needed to vote for something like "OMG teh Patriots blew teh Superbowlz LOL Day" or something.

Answer 4

Direct Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what's for dinner.

Liberty is a well-armed lamb objecting to the decision.