🚀 go-pugleaf

Novaphile wrote:
>

> If we changed the current representational democracy to direct democracy
> via electronic communication, then there will be nothing to stop the mob
> from using its instant, ill-informed, xenophobic will to the detriment of
> anyone or anything that is slightly unusual.
> 
> How many people _still_ maintain that Lindy Chamberlain is
> guilty/innocent without _ever_ having access to the evidence?
> 
> Would an instant Supermarket Vote have condemned Lindy to death?
> 
> Try to remember that 20 million people who know nothing about a
> particular subject ALL HAVE AN OPINION ON THAT SUBJECT.
> 
> The desire of the mob does not equate with rationality or even good
> outcomes for society.


I see democracy as a necessary evil in the same way that the State is.
We need a State to keep the peace and to facilitate commercial and civil
interaction. Thus we need administrators at the helm to put laws in
place which help achieve these aims. 

Democracy is really most compatible with a limited government. I would
have no problem with direct democracty if either- the restrictions that
could be voted in by dorect democracy would only apply to small
jurisdictions with freedom of entry and exit where people are free to
make a choice about whether they wish to accept these restrictions; or
the government is restricted from doing certain things anyway.

The role of democracy is essentially to prevent the administrators from
abusing their power. There is no intrinsic value to it.