A direct democracy, the original kind where every citizen could vote on government decisions & law...

A direct democracy, the original kind where every citizen could vote on government decisions & law, is very feasible now. Consider being able to vote on a nationwide policy of multiculturalism for example, every eligible voter being able to vote, right from your own home. How do you think it would turn out?

What would result if this direct vote was applied to all decisions and law? I believe the answer is the reason why it's not being done. But I would like to see how Prime Minister Trudeau would react if he was presented with this direct democracy as a system to realistically consider switching to.

god do i hate cosplay

Voting is stupid because someone completely ignorant has the same weight of an absolute expert.

/thread

Hilary would have won in a direct democracy

This

>Hilary would have won in a direct democracy

who told you this?

CNN?

but...

no she wouldn't

Some is alright, most of it is girls wearing a costume that barely looks like the character and mostly just shows off their tits or arse.

>We can do something that didn't work hundreds of years ago on a small scale on a larger scale, I'm sure it'll work perfectly fine and won't have massive issues again.

>Hilary would have won in a direct democracy
Hillary wouldn't exist in a direct democracy.

It would be one of the worst systems possible, governing from the middle, ensuring mediocrity. Collapse of civilization. A nightmare

Better than having kings who would force you to eat shit

Except not everyone has acess to the Internet.

Except identity verification would not be possible.

Except it could be hacked.

People could literally hack democracy.

Democracy was never met for nations

The small city states and public forums of the Athenians are on replaceable on a large scale.

it sounds nice but the problem like with all the democracy is that it tends not to be ruled by THE PEOPLE but rather a small amount of people who are good at telling the general populace what their thoughts/ideas and attitudes should be - a "small clique of democracy makers" so to speak.
I think the worst was probably in the haydays of mass media in the 20th century - it was better before when people talking face-tof-face was one of them main vector of idea propagation and it is a bit better now when the Internet and its multitude of channels and anonymity allows people to bypass traditional media.
Though the Internet will be clamped down upon as we see and all kinds of agencies have their own shilling and propaganda methods developed better and better.

>direct democracy
you mean mob rule

Voting needs to be harder and more exclusive, not easier.

Protip: The benefit of democracy is NOT some bleeding-heart shit about "Fairness" that makes you feel warm and fuzzy, you faggot.
The benefit is giving the IMPRESSION of fair governance for the sake of stability, and to that end, the only people who need to be voting are people with some amount of power.

If you have no money, no property, and no initiative, your opinion factually does not matter, and society is only harmed by such people helping to shape government.

This is also a train of thought that some people have, but its also wrong.
A non-expert who has money, property, and drive has just as much ability to create civil unrest if he gets shafted by the political landscape.
All of a person's opinions could be completely retarded, but if they have some power, they need to be pacified in some way.

*not

The Republic, conceived by the Roman's works better. It at least gives citizens the illusion. Of having g some impact on decision making.

One thing we should implement into our system is the consulsulship.

Instead of a prime minister. 2 officials are elected In a separate election from the house election every year.

They share the power. One is patrician. (Must have above the MEDIAN income of Canada.)

The other a plebian (must have BELOW the median income of Canada)

All our prime ministers have come from money. The Roman's understood class hierarchy a lot better then ducking marx. They realized that it was the natural order of things that some families are noble and others are not.

They also realized the importance of the plebians and that in order to stop anything like communism from arising the power in society must be shared.

Or at least have the illusion of being shared (all politicians can be bought)

I can't remember the exact Roman system but we should do something like this

Actually, no, its not.

See, a monarchy is a roll of the dice.
You get a good ruler or a bad ruler, and you're stuck with it barring revolt (Although revolt is never barred).

Democracy, on the other hand, is GUARANTEED to fail since it incentivizes every politician to rush towards popular, but unsustainable, policies.

What government fundamentally needs is people who will do the responsible thing as opposed to what's popular.
Democracy specifically torpedoes such individuals.

jewish merchants sold flax (high in estrogen) to rome before it fell.

That's why you need weighted votes.

Palais des congrès de Montréal - Comicon.

3D will just never beat 2D

>is very feasible now.

Except it absolutely is not. Find me one poll on the internet that can't be rigged.

>Except not everyone has acess to the Internet.
phone system
>Except identity verification would not be possible.
Enter unique citizen code
>Except it could be hacked.
everything could be hacked, part of current year living
>People could literally hack democracy.
Does Russia and/or DNC ring a bell?
>Democracy was never met for nations
not before they had the necessary comm means
>The small city states and public forums of the Athenians are on replaceable on a large scale.
Yes they are, that's the whole point. It can be done using modern communication systems

Biometrics. Simple as that.

The reason you don't see it being used is because there isn't a NEED to biometrically secure an online poll.

Obliviously there is all kinds of issues that would need to be taken care of, but i would like to see some well off western country try a more direct democratic system. Ignoring all the verification issues it should also be made so that the voters are forced to read upon the topic if they want to vote on it but on general id like to try this.

At least everyone would know what is being considered and have a say. Canada's policy on multiculturalism was decided exclusively by upper neoclass politicians, then dumped on the populace who were not consulted and who had no say on the matter

see
The reason not to do it isn't because it can't be done.
The reason not to do it is because its fucking dumb.

Really? Sounds like a factoid but I wouldn't be surprised.

The reason the Republic fell however is no speculation. Generals had too much power. So one caeser was confident he was the best general a coup was not hard to achieve. Turning the grand old Republic into an empire where successors were named (foolishly, same problems as monarchy, just because one person a good leader doesn't mean his son will be)

I completely agree with you. Siddhis can make anime 'real'.

>Canada's policy on multiculturalism was decided exclusively by upper neoclass politicians
Protip: There are consequences to what you describe. Consequences which can generally be called "Instability".

Direct democracy would simply replace one source of instability with another.
Understand that even just having passion, or WILLPOWER is a real, tangible form of power. But people without ANY kind of power literally do not matter.

Who weights them? It's a recursive problem, brainlet.

Democracy doesnt work on a large population because dumb people bandwagons. kings appoints experts to do shit. most of the buildings built in UK are built by appointed architects, london bridge, westmin abbey, big ben.

Saudi Arabia, who still have kings with absolute power, is a successful and rich country. owned huge oil reserve, built tallest tower, built cities on desert sands, an ocean sands. cant do that in America because "muh rights".
hell,America couldnt even finish Mount Rushmore because no money, no incentives.

In the post I responded to, you were arguing that democracy was better, so I'm confused.

I wonder when chicks will start cosplaying as Lauren Southern.

loomer already does