|
In many democratic systems, people vote for someone to represent them, say in Parliament or in a Council. One of the problems with this is that the people who are elected, may not act as the people who voted for them want to. There are several voting systems that seek to do better in that respect, such as a referendum that lets people vote yes or no on one specific question.
Computer technology makes it increasingly easier for people to vote more frequently on specific topics; however, many people do not like voting, and certainly not if they have to do so often. Therefore, there's a possibility that voter apathy will be greater than with general elections. This could mean that small groups with extreme ideas could have enormous influence - it could give an advantage to those who are politically aware and computer-savvy, but it could also give advantage to fundamentalism and dogmatic thought. That may not all be bad news, but it's something to give more tought to.
There are further concerns about referendums, the main one being the possibility of contradictionary outcomes (e.g. people want higher unemployment benefits AND lower taxes); furthermore, there's the argument that general elections will result in a more balanced and harmonious package of measures. Then, there is the possibility of fraud (who control the computers?), and the possibility of bias (who formulates the questions? Using specific wording will result in a positive outcome, whereas asking the same thing using other words will result in a negative outcome); and finally, there remains the possibility of judicial venturing into politics (who decides whether a question or outcome is appropriate, say, in relation to the Constitution).
Another, more promising form of direct-democracy is to let market mechanisms decide, that is, if choices have to be made in the first place; of course, once things are taken out of the hands of politicians, there is less need to force people to make a choice (which they may later come to regret).
This type of direct-democracy does not rely on voting, at least not in regard to choices such as what products or services people select. Instead of electing an official who decides for all people who is allowed to operate a service (and how), people can simply make that choice if and when they decide to obtain a product or service. The one concern with this latter form of direct-democracy is in the area of trade practices. The question is what laws, if any, should govern trade practices. Consumer education alone could be sufficient, but this is clearly an issue for further discussion.
Anyway, the Direct-Democracy network is proud to offer free information. If you'd like to discuss anything in further detail, or if you'd like to suggest links, feel encouraged to post a message at:
The Libertaria group at Yahoo!