2007-07-17 05:30:55 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
We the people would have a much louder voice!
2007-07-17 05:39:43 · update #1
Did we not talk about the "tyranny of the majority" before?
Did you read that discussion?
2007-07-17 09:21:48 · answer #1 · answered by ? 6 · 2⤊ 0⤋
I'm sorry but I have to seriously dissagree with this line of thought. Majority rules (aka Mob Rule) is a horrible system of government, and as a matter of fact I believe that is no small part of the current problem.
Do you know how many Congresspersons do not even read or know what the bills they are voting on are about? The intent of a representative democracy was to allow people to appoint Reps that could focus on the issues at hand and represent their will accordingly, because the avg persons opinion is based in no small part to hasty judgement due to the demands of life.
Lets just take a look at a couple of things that would not had occured in our history if Mob Rule was law:
Emancipation of the Slaves (horribly unpopular issue of the time)
Civil Rights Law (most people don't like to admit it, but the south was'nt the only state with problems with this! some polls listed over 2/3rd of national population NOT in support of a Civil Rights amendment or repealing of 'Jim Crow' laws)
2007-07-17 05:39:00 · answer #2 · answered by Eric B 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋
No, it would produce just the opposite effect, lower voter participation--I'm assuming the goal would be to increase participation, but keep in mind that would not necessarily be a good thing in itself; a higher voter turnout usu sally means participation by individuals unqualified by reasons of lack of intellect. Getting back to the question, though, one only needs to look at generally low turnouts in state and local referenda to understand the possibilities if every issue national politics was subject to the same thing.
2007-07-17 05:38:45 · answer #3 · answered by nacmanpriscasellers 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I'm not sure, but imagine the amount of voters that would turn out if key issues were put to the voters. If voters were asked to vote on abortion in the upcoming presidential election, the voter turnout would be overwhelming.
2007-07-17 05:35:01 · answer #4 · answered by wooper 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
increase election participation?
We need a line to vote "None of the Above".
Those who feel this way do not vote.
Bet the turnout would be phenomenal if we could vote on that.
2007-07-17 05:35:37 · answer #5 · answered by ed 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No!! I absolutely abhor the idea of a bunch of yayhoos with no clue being swayed by slick PR ads screwing up my life.
Yes, I know, the republican Party has been doing this for decades. I rest my case.
2007-07-17 05:38:44 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
.I don't think that the political aristocracy would support that suggestion, they like to make the decisions, usually to our detriment.
but you are correct, it is possible for the people to give their opinions electronically, and we would do a far better job that the bought and paid for politicians
2007-07-17 06:15:55 · answer #7 · answered by Ringo G. 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
majority rule is mob rule
2007-07-17 05:37:13 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
Sure, if this was a pure democracy, but it's not. It's a republic.
2007-07-17 05:42:29 · answer #9 · answered by Chad 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋