I believe that we no longer have need for the archaic system of representative democracy.
It has too many shortfalls that Direct democracy does not. With modern technology, or even without, vote collection systems would be streamlined.
I will give an example of a direct democratic system.
Joe Jones decides he doesn't like the current graduated tax system of Democria. He drafts a bill which if made law, would simplify and change the tax system to a flat 10% federal income tax rate, and make null all other existing federal taxes.
Mr. Jones brings the bill to his neighborhood congressman. This 'congressman' lives just down the street from Joe, and was elected for this year as the man who would have the duty of collecting votes of these hundred constituents. In all reality, this man's duty is more like glorified newspaper delivery. He presents bills to his constituents.
In any case, Mr. Jones' bill is then presented to the other 98 citizens. They can yea, nay, or abstain.
The votes are then tallied once everyone in the constituency has been informed of, and made their decision about the proposed law.
The yeas and nays are both recorded. Mr Jones' bill was lovingly accepted by the majority of these 100 citizens!
Now The neighborhood congressman shall bring the numbers and bill up to the man elected as the congressman of 1,000, and he shall have the ten congressmen under him deliver the bills to their constituents. Once again, the yeas and nays shall be tallied, and then if the bill gets a yea majority of even a single vote, it shall move to the elected congressman of 10,000 citizens.
This will keep going up the line, until the bill is defeated or accepted by everyone. The vote will keep expanding its audience by powers of ten. Now, this does not mean that simply because a bill was defeated in one area, that any citizen in any area cannot simply start the process again, with either an identical or slightly modified bill.
After all, there's an online database open to the public that allows anyone from any part of the country to see what bills are being voted on across the nation. A citizen can start a vote in his area on a bill that he likes even if he didn't write it.
There are local laws, and there are federal laws. Local laws affect a local area only, but cannot be in contradiction with federal laws. They only need to be passed by the locality. Say, a constituency of 1,000,000. Federal laws however must be passed by the entire nation, and overrule local law.
Now there is no misrepresentation of constituents. All constituents are represented because the yeas and nays are both recorded.
The nays in one area will not be forgotten in the counting on the highest level, allowing a more accurate picture of the support for a law.
Heck, there might even be laws that limit the number of pages in laws, and the minimum size of lettering.
"In Constituency X, a local law was recently passed that limited the number of pages in a bill to ten, so that laws could be understood and voted on more quickly. It is gaining much headway in nearby Constituency Y."
Now, poke holes in it, and talk about stuff. Write your own ideas. I apologize if it seems jumbled.
It has too many shortfalls that Direct democracy does not. With modern technology, or even without, vote collection systems would be streamlined.
I will give an example of a direct democratic system.
Joe Jones decides he doesn't like the current graduated tax system of Democria. He drafts a bill which if made law, would simplify and change the tax system to a flat 10% federal income tax rate, and make null all other existing federal taxes.
Mr. Jones brings the bill to his neighborhood congressman. This 'congressman' lives just down the street from Joe, and was elected for this year as the man who would have the duty of collecting votes of these hundred constituents. In all reality, this man's duty is more like glorified newspaper delivery. He presents bills to his constituents.
In any case, Mr. Jones' bill is then presented to the other 98 citizens. They can yea, nay, or abstain.
The votes are then tallied once everyone in the constituency has been informed of, and made their decision about the proposed law.
The yeas and nays are both recorded. Mr Jones' bill was lovingly accepted by the majority of these 100 citizens!
Now The neighborhood congressman shall bring the numbers and bill up to the man elected as the congressman of 1,000, and he shall have the ten congressmen under him deliver the bills to their constituents. Once again, the yeas and nays shall be tallied, and then if the bill gets a yea majority of even a single vote, it shall move to the elected congressman of 10,000 citizens.
This will keep going up the line, until the bill is defeated or accepted by everyone. The vote will keep expanding its audience by powers of ten. Now, this does not mean that simply because a bill was defeated in one area, that any citizen in any area cannot simply start the process again, with either an identical or slightly modified bill.
After all, there's an online database open to the public that allows anyone from any part of the country to see what bills are being voted on across the nation. A citizen can start a vote in his area on a bill that he likes even if he didn't write it.
There are local laws, and there are federal laws. Local laws affect a local area only, but cannot be in contradiction with federal laws. They only need to be passed by the locality. Say, a constituency of 1,000,000. Federal laws however must be passed by the entire nation, and overrule local law.
Now there is no misrepresentation of constituents. All constituents are represented because the yeas and nays are both recorded.
The nays in one area will not be forgotten in the counting on the highest level, allowing a more accurate picture of the support for a law.
Heck, there might even be laws that limit the number of pages in laws, and the minimum size of lettering.
"In Constituency X, a local law was recently passed that limited the number of pages in a bill to ten, so that laws could be understood and voted on more quickly. It is gaining much headway in nearby Constituency Y."
Now, poke holes in it, and talk about stuff. Write your own ideas. I apologize if it seems jumbled.
, and the Greeks were an entirely peaceful bunch of city states that never fought each other, never enslaved each other given half the chance, and killed off entire populations like Milos whenever it was convenient to do so or the general population was miffed that such a small village was opposing their hegemony.
