[jedberg]

Direct democracy is terrible. Look at reddit as an example. Without any spam controls, it would be a complete disaster.

Most voters aren't informed. Despite all the information being available no one looks at it. For example, when I fill out my California ballot once every two years, I spend a day reading all of the new proposed laws and reading on the backgrounds of all the people. Then most of my very intelligent friends just ask me to tell them how I'm voting and why, because they don't have time to read.

And that's once every two years. There is no way I'd have time to do that for every law. That's what politicians are for -- to be experts on the law and to hire other experts to inform them.

It's far too complicated to possibly be well informed on every issue.

[tocs3]

> Direct democracy is terrible. Look at reddit as an example.

A direct democracy might be good or bad but the reddit example does not really fit. As far as I know reddit is not going to pass local traffic laws or impose new federal taxes.

[jedberg]

It won't but look at what gets popular. Since I worked there I know what would have been popular without spam controls, and it's even worse. Very few people read the articles before voting. They pretty much vote on headlines alone.

[tocs3]

I certainly understand the part about the "population" getting out of control but isn't management (and you as a sort of enforcement) serving as government? It makes it a little more like a light hands dictatorship?

(Just for disclosure I am not a reddit user. Just some times when a search result looks useful).

[tevlon]

[deleted]

[jedberg]

That's not at all what I said, but you sort of proved my point for me - voters aren't willing or able to take the time to understand the issues or the nuance involved with each one, much less every issue.

[tevlon]

just look at switzerland. They have direct democracy and they don't have a problem with corruption at all. Why you wouldn't want that?

Polictians are a thing for the history books.

Also: In Switzerland, you don't HAVE TO vote. You can vote. It's optional. It works. Just open your mind, man.

[jedberg]

Switzerland does not have direct democracy like you propose. They have a referendum system with up to four votes a year. California has the same system. That was in fact the system I was talking about in my first comment, that I spend a day researching for each vote and then everyone just does what I tell them because they trust me. I'm basically a politician for six people.

It has its pros and cons. For example in Switzerland it caused the veto of a much needed infrastructure project. In California it leads to nearly all of the state's budget being allocated by law without any flexibility for emergencies.

And Switzerland still has political parties. They are the ones that write most of the referendums.

[tocs3]

It is the same in the US (the right, not obligation, to vote). It is a good thing but there is a fair but of social pressure to vote here. I hear people talk about voting for people be cause they are better that the other guy.