JemmyGovernment should be smaller!
submitted by
irelephant [he/him]๐ญ
19 Comments
Comments from other communities
Me an anarchist:
Now chop the heads of the three rulers left and leave the power to the people to govern bottom up through mutual aid and collaboration.
Aaand that's where we started. Power naturally piles up and the choice becomes whether you like it to be socialised into democracy while it occasionally crumble into autocracy, or to have it privatised into feudalism.
3yiyo3
Nyssa SylvaticaThis is amazing. Very simple but powerful message. I'd recommend sharing on corporate social media for people who aren't on the Fediverse because they're the ones that need it most
...yeah, that's not how that works. You need massive government supporting your ship, to keep everyone in line.
Honestly with the way the internet exists now, we might feasibly be able to do something closer to direct democracy.
But good luck convincing the people in charge to lay down their power.
I say liquid democracy would be better
Super earth has my vote for managed democracy! o7
Perhaps, though Iโd be very concerned for mob mentality. Social media is famously reactive.
No doubt. I think an easy way to counter that is to put a โdeliberationโ time on legislation. Iโm spitballing but maybe require two votes 3 months apart, and they must both agree (otherwise thereโs a third tiebreaker vote another 3 months later)? That would help kill off the flash fire effect that a viral meme can create and focus more on fixing problems that occur over a longer period of time.
I mean Iโm no political scientist so Iโd love to hear more about what methods are proven for direct democracy.
Making a second decision mandatory makes it harder to change existing laws. This can be a good thing in some cases, but not always. It increases conservatism (in that it's harder to change things).
No doubt. The goal is to make it harder for memes to affect the outcome of a decision.
Another way to approach it is if a supermajority votes for something, no secondary confirmation vote is required. Eg. reproductive choice would easily pass with one vote because it has such widespread support.
Was it... the Persians? Maybe? Anyway, they had to make two choices on any decision, once when drunk and again sober a few days later. If rhe choice was the same both times it was deemed a good idea.
I have zero idea if this is fact, but it sounds similar to your idea.
Ooh never heard that but it kinda makes sense
I really hope it's not some fever dream, or total bullshit, but it kind of makes sense. I'll see if I can find some facts on it.
Here is a link talking about it, so maybe it's plausible?
They have already started doing this in Taiwan
Yeah no....as much as our current system sucks, I'd rather have some sort of a buffer before full on mob rule.
People are dumb, panicky, dangerous animals...and you know it.
Full on direct democracy sounds like a good idea. Until you realize it's two wolves and a sheep making dinner plans.
I fail to see how thatโs different than the way it currently works, except you get the tyranny of the far right minority instead of tyranny of the majority.
Or another way to look at it, with your analogy, instead of two wolves, you have one professional career wolf who is far more effective at his job.
Nah it's more like the wolves lawyers and the sheep's lawyers fight it out. Like a proxy war.
Ew. I almost clicked a Reddit link. ๐คฎ
Mostly /s. Kinda.
My sincere apologies.
Tumblr source: https://ahoyuniverse.com/
Doing the lord's work. Thank you
Ironically as libertarian (not capitalist) I guess I want BIGGEST government.