Liquid Democracy

[Martin]

Nice little concept...not gonna happen, but still an interesting read.

http://www.kuro5hin.org/story/2003/7/16/201556/896

 

[Bowfinger]

Interesting idea, but too many practical problems for the real world. It would seem to be open for abuse, with people being intimidated to assign their proxy to whoever threatend them the most. Even employers could pressure employees to assign their proxies to someone who would vote in the company's interest.

If we could get past that problem, it's fun to ponder some of the other ramifications. Would special interest groups lose their influence, or would they gain enough proxies to expand it? I'm thinking about groups like the NRA and AARP. Would broad-ideology political parties become obsolete, replaced by scores of specialty parties, or would they become even more powerful when most people don't want to bother with democracy?

Would people have the discipline to pass responsible legislation? Would there be adequate checks and balances to keep people from voting themselves bread and circuses? What if the public voted to eliminate all taxes, but provide unlimited services? What if we, the people, voted to forbid banks from charging interest and service fees; if we voted to outlaw debt collection; if we voted for free 100 Mb broadband in every home? It would be quite an experiment.

Thanks for the link.

 

[sandorski]

Yup, that is an interesting idea. It does sound a little too optomistic though.

 

[CADsortaGUY]

Originally posted by: GuyDebordJudoClub
That is the future of real democracy.
Every citizen must have the right to vote for or against every law.

Good thing we know that "true" Democracy wouldn't work and will stop well short of it. People don't and won't micro manage their politics and positions. The "swing" people (or fence sitters) would be marginalized unless they alway showed up to vote.

Good in theory but lacks reality.

CkG

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: GuyDebordJudoClub
That is the future of real democracy.
Every citizen must have the right to vote for or against every law.

While that sounds appealing, it requires informed (and understanding the information) citizen - an utopia just like the idea of communism. ppl do not want to think, especially not on topics that might affect them only very indirectly...

 

[sandorski]

Though this "Liquid Democraacy" is too optomistic, certain variations on it could be implemented. One variation could b something like this: Maintain the current Representation, but set up a method for voters to give direct input into the workings of the government.

How this would work is that for every Law, Declaration(War, Condemnation, or other Official statement on some issue), and call for investigation, the Voter can register their position directly on the matter. If a certain percentage(or other criteria) of voters choose a particular position, then that position is adopted despite what the Representatives choose. Using this method(depending on the criteria), only certain issues would be overridden by the Electorate, as most issues wouldn't generate enough interest to get the necessary number of votes.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: GuyDebordJudoClub
Why do you think it is too optimistic?
It is not a question of optimism or pessimism it is a question of getting closer to real democracy.
Today's republican constitutions all over the globe are far from being really democratic.
We should implement a mechanism to give everyone the possibility to have a more active democratic life, while at the same time retaining today's possibility of giving all your representative power to a single person.
In some brazilian cities people have the right to vote on how 10% of the city's budget shall be spent in their neighbourhood, and then exercize their right to control how this money is spent. It works. Not everyone gets involved but some do and inform their neighbours and good decisions come out of it.
If you are a true democrat at heart you should desire that democratic institutions give the possibility to every citizen to get fully involved in public decisions.

I am a true supporter of Democracy and am ready to fully participate in a "Liquid Democracy", but I'm also a realist and realize that many(if not most) are not ready for that level of particapation, in North America(US specifically). The current system only requires input every other year yet few participate as it is, to expect the same people to participate daily is what is too optomistic.

Another problem with this particular setup lies in the Proxy Vote feature. There are some issues that are not always clearly Social, Fiscal, or other category as well. I can see that there could be issues where multiple Proxy Votes are attempted to be made by multiple Proxy Voters on a particular issue, mucking up the process.

That said, the current system(again specifically in the US, but also elsewhere) is clearly in need of change, I just am not a believer in Revolutionary change. Evolutionary change is much more constructive.