[mjw1007]

I think Brexit can also be seen as an argument for more direct democracy: if there had been a referendum in the UK on one or more of the major changes in the EU treaties in the previous 25 years, I think it's likely that Brexit wouldn't have happened, or else that it would have happened much earlier with less damage as a result.

[wpietri]

Speaking as a Californian, where our ballot is always filled with propositions [1] [2], I can confidently say this is a bad idea. I think it works tolerably well for issues that are something an average citizen can understand with a little research, but otherwise just ends up as dueling propaganda campaigns.

For example, this year San Francisco voted to decide whether one of the major streets through Golden Gate Park should remain mostly car free after we tried that for the pandemic. That seems like a fine use. But there was a state prop titled "REQUIRES ON-SITE LICENSED MEDICAL PROFESSIONAL AT KIDNEY DIALYSIS CLINICS AND ESTABLISHES OTHER STATE REQUIREMENTS. INITIATIVE STATUTE." This was some sort of high-dollar fight among vested interests fought via sketchy ballot proposition and it absolutely should not have been on the ballot.

(You also can quickly run into tyranny-of-the-majority issues. E.g., famously liberal and tolerant California in 2008 voted to strip an already-existing civil right from a minority. [3])

For complex issues, I think it's better to have the decision-making concentrated in the hands of highly supervised professionals with staffs who have the time to understand the issues enough so that they have a chance of understanding the impacts. Rather than more direct democracy, what I'd like to see is more transparency and accountability for those professionals.

[1] In our most recent election we had 7 state propositions: https://www.sos.ca.gov/elections/ballot-measures/qualified-b...

[2] And 15 local ones: https://voterguide.sfelections.org/en/local-ballot-measure-a...

[3] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2008_California_Proposition_8

[danaris]

Brexit wasn't based on actual harm caused by EU treaties. It was caused by bigotry, fear over economic issues being very deliberately misdirected due to propaganda, and a host of outright lies on the part of the Leave campaign.

[wpietri]

I see you're getting downvoted, but as an American who followed the whole mess remotely, that sounds about right to me. The only thing I'd add was that I think it started as intra-party infighting and political dramatics that got wildly out of control.