What would happen if our politicians really served our interests as democracy suggests that they do?
Let's say that in every home in America was a device the size of a picture frame (or kindle) mounted on a wall. This device would show you what issues congress would be debating on and ask you if you were interested in giving your input. If you were so inclined, you could read what the issues were and how a yea or nay vote would impact you specifically. Then you could actually vote. Using wireless technology, the vote would be sent to your congressman, sent to a safe database, and you would receive a printed receipt.
The congressman would be able to better serve his constituency by representing their wishes in this way.
Is America ready for something like this? For democracy?
-
In total there are 22 users online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 22 guests (based on users active over the past 60 minutes)
Most users ever online was 1086 on Mon Jul 01, 2024 9:03 am
Taking Control
Forum rules
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
Do not promote books in this forum. Instead, promote your books in either Authors: Tell us about your FICTION book! or Authors: Tell us about your NON-FICTION book!.
All other Community Rules apply in this and all other forums.
-
President Camacho
-
- I Should Be Bronzed
- Posts: 1655
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:44 pm
- 16
- Location: Hampton, Ga
- Has thanked: 246 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
-
Theomanic
-
- Agrees that Reading is Fundamental
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:34 pm
- 16
- Location: Toronto, ON
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 24 times
Personally, I am not in love with democracy. The problem is that it means the majority rules, which is silly. Just because a lot of people think something is right doesn't mean it is.
I'm happy to vote someone in power and let them and the people around them make decisions. If they're bad, they won't stay in power. It's like hiring someone to do a job and then not trusting them to do it. I certainly don't know how to run a country, who am I to tell the leader of the country how to do it?
The idea of every person in America having a vote on every issue, easily and conveniently? Chilling. Is America ready for it? I couldn't say. I think that those higher in power do realize the less they let the people have say in, the better.
I'm happy to vote someone in power and let them and the people around them make decisions. If they're bad, they won't stay in power. It's like hiring someone to do a job and then not trusting them to do it. I certainly don't know how to run a country, who am I to tell the leader of the country how to do it?
The idea of every person in America having a vote on every issue, easily and conveniently? Chilling. Is America ready for it? I couldn't say. I think that those higher in power do realize the less they let the people have say in, the better.
"Beware those who are always reading books" - The Genius of the Crowd, by Charles Bukowski
-
Ophelia
-
- Oddly Attracted to Books
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 7:33 am
- 16
- Location: France
- Been thanked: 35 times
P. Camacho wrote:
I think that "instant" expressing of opinions is frightening, because it does away with the necessity of being informed or being able to understand the matter at hand. Most of those issues are very complex.
About the wisdom of the common folk: as I was writing in my journal yesterday about my pet topics, Steve sent me a post referring to an unbelievable prohecy I had never heard of.
Steve wrote:
In the context of this post, it makes me wonder whether some "folks" shouln't be barred from voting at all until they've learnt some sense. (said good sense could be checked again after a period of 5 years when voting privileges might be returned).
Here is one reference I found:
"The European Union's influence is growing at a phenomenal rate. Soon its economy will, it is predicted, eclipse that of the U.S. in almost every category. It is a beast just about to be released upon an unsuspecting world."
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-eu.html
Theomanic wrote:The congressman would be able to better serve his constituency by representing their wishes in this way.
Is America ready for something like this? For democracy?
The usual thing people say about democracy is that we just haven't invented anything better yet, so we're stuck with it.The idea of every person in America having a vote on every issue, easily and conveniently? Chilling. Is America ready for it? I couldn't say. I think that those higher in power do realize the less they let the people have say in, the better.
I think that "instant" expressing of opinions is frightening, because it does away with the necessity of being informed or being able to understand the matter at hand. Most of those issues are very complex.
About the wisdom of the common folk: as I was writing in my journal yesterday about my pet topics, Steve sent me a post referring to an unbelievable prohecy I had never heard of.
Steve wrote:
Do you know that there is a significant number of people in America who believe the EU and the stars represent part of the fullfillment of the prophecy regarding the "end times?
In the context of this post, it makes me wonder whether some "folks" shouln't be barred from voting at all until they've learnt some sense. (said good sense could be checked again after a period of 5 years when voting privileges might be returned).
Here is one reference I found:
"The European Union's influence is growing at a phenomenal rate. Soon its economy will, it is predicted, eclipse that of the U.S. in almost every category. It is a beast just about to be released upon an unsuspecting world."
http://www.raptureready.com/rr-eu.html
Last edited by Ophelia on Tue Apr 22, 2008 9:45 am, edited 2 times in total.
Ophelia.
-
Theomanic
-
- Agrees that Reading is Fundamental
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:34 pm
- 16
- Location: Toronto, ON
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 24 times
I often feel there should be tests for a lot of things. But sadly, there is no one trustworthy enough to write these tests. Voting is a good example, and also parenting. Some people just should be barred from these practices till they become informed individuals. It's not even about education, it's about common sense. Maybe that should be the test for all such things. A common sense test. 
"Beware those who are always reading books" - The Genius of the Crowd, by Charles Bukowski
-
Ophelia
-
- Oddly Attracted to Books
- Posts: 1543
- Joined: Sun Nov 25, 2007 7:33 am
- 16
- Location: France
- Been thanked: 35 times
Mr President,
What you suggested is a modern version of direct democracy, which only exists, I think, in Switzerland.
Nobody ever much hears about the Swiss, so we can suppose that this system works for them.
It's a small country with mostly reasonable citizens, not given as a group to wild or irrational behaviour.
The electronic aspect you've introduced would help to solve some of the practical problem direct democracy entails:
- It's expensive to organize a poll "every other Sunday" as the Swiss will tell you.
- Regular voting leads to even greater voter apathy than in a representative democracy.
One would think it's wonderful to be able to give your opinion on everything, but the reality is in fact rather boring from what I heard.
So, the "kindle" device would take care of that, and that leads to the next problem: who reads the laws before voting on them?
Do you remember this scene from Farhrenheit 9/11 when a US Representative tells Michael Moore that they don't know what's in the laws, it would take too much time to read them, they just vote them!
And after that you see M Moore in a van reading the Patriot Act with a loudspeaker in front of Congress?
I was amazed that a Congressman should dare to say a thing like that on camera-- he didn't look in the least embarrassed.
I thought those people were trained to understand difficult legal texts and that it was their duty to do so.
Then now we also have French MPs telling journalists (off camera) that they wouldn't mind answering their questions about such and such bill, but couldn't the journalist sum up the bill for them first because they're so busy and have so much reading to do?
So, you might say, if the MPs don't read the bills, perhaps the voters wouldn't do any worse?
Still, for the moment, I'd say representative democracy is the best we can do.
What you suggested is a modern version of direct democracy, which only exists, I think, in Switzerland.
Nobody ever much hears about the Swiss, so we can suppose that this system works for them.
It's a small country with mostly reasonable citizens, not given as a group to wild or irrational behaviour.
The electronic aspect you've introduced would help to solve some of the practical problem direct democracy entails:
- It's expensive to organize a poll "every other Sunday" as the Swiss will tell you.
- Regular voting leads to even greater voter apathy than in a representative democracy.
One would think it's wonderful to be able to give your opinion on everything, but the reality is in fact rather boring from what I heard.
So, the "kindle" device would take care of that, and that leads to the next problem: who reads the laws before voting on them?
Do you remember this scene from Farhrenheit 9/11 when a US Representative tells Michael Moore that they don't know what's in the laws, it would take too much time to read them, they just vote them!
And after that you see M Moore in a van reading the Patriot Act with a loudspeaker in front of Congress?
I was amazed that a Congressman should dare to say a thing like that on camera-- he didn't look in the least embarrassed.
I thought those people were trained to understand difficult legal texts and that it was their duty to do so.
Then now we also have French MPs telling journalists (off camera) that they wouldn't mind answering their questions about such and such bill, but couldn't the journalist sum up the bill for them first because they're so busy and have so much reading to do?
So, you might say, if the MPs don't read the bills, perhaps the voters wouldn't do any worse?
Still, for the moment, I'd say representative democracy is the best we can do.
Last edited by Ophelia on Tue Apr 22, 2008 10:31 am, edited 1 time in total.
Ophelia.
-
Penelope
-
- One more post ought to do it.
- Posts: 3267
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:49 am
- 16
- Location: Cheshire, England
- Has thanked: 323 times
- Been thanked: 679 times
- Gender:
This is an interesting thread.
We used to have honourable MP's. I know we did because my Mum used to talk to me about them and what they were trying to achieve in setting up our National Health Service etc.
I have read some of the biographies of these men. Bevan, Michael Foot, Clement Atlee etc.....they are from the 1940/50's. Surely there are still some men of integrity left in Government.
It is just so difficult to identify them because everything now is about 'image'. Michael Foot - had no image....he looked like a scarecrow all of his life....but he had complete integrity and people trusted him. What has happened to us? When Tony Blair was elected as our leader it was in preference to a man called Robin Cook. Robin, was no oil painting, a small ginger headed dwarf - but with more intelligence in his little finger that all the rest put together. But he hadn't got the glamour and appeal of Mr. Blair.
Too much spin.....too much on personality and appearance....not enough on integrity and substance.
The Western World has become dazzled by 'glamour'.
We are influenced, not to say 'conditioned' by the the newspapers and the television....to admire the wrong things about a person.
We used to have honourable MP's. I know we did because my Mum used to talk to me about them and what they were trying to achieve in setting up our National Health Service etc.
I have read some of the biographies of these men. Bevan, Michael Foot, Clement Atlee etc.....they are from the 1940/50's. Surely there are still some men of integrity left in Government.
It is just so difficult to identify them because everything now is about 'image'. Michael Foot - had no image....he looked like a scarecrow all of his life....but he had complete integrity and people trusted him. What has happened to us? When Tony Blair was elected as our leader it was in preference to a man called Robin Cook. Robin, was no oil painting, a small ginger headed dwarf - but with more intelligence in his little finger that all the rest put together. But he hadn't got the glamour and appeal of Mr. Blair.
Too much spin.....too much on personality and appearance....not enough on integrity and substance.
The Western World has become dazzled by 'glamour'.
We are influenced, not to say 'conditioned' by the the newspapers and the television....to admire the wrong things about a person.
-
President Camacho
-
- I Should Be Bronzed
- Posts: 1655
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:44 pm
- 16
- Location: Hampton, Ga
- Has thanked: 246 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
Humans have come quite a long way because of how we are able to build on our collective knowledge. Common sense yesterday is no longer common sense today. Sometimes knowledge is gained and sometimes it is lost. Though, it's hard to dispute that progress has been made.
Our existence and social development as a species reminds me of the stock market. It has its ups and downs but is forever moving in an upward trend.
Some see this as a maturing of our species and its societies. We are learning and growing smarter with every new generation. Although there will be 'dips' and not every individual will be a "winner", we will be growing wiser as a species (upward trend).
Sometimes I wonder if this upward trend can be helped or not. Can we find some way of eliminating or decreasing the magnitude of the dips? Whatever happens, it doesn't seem like social progress can be forced.
I also wonder if social progress would somehow be retarded or skewed with the implementation of more licenses and tests. Valuable lessons can be learned from making mistakes. We might need to make them individually and as a society/species in order to grow.
I find it super interesting that people are paranoid of other people (I am too). That is awesome. It's almost like they know that the average person is fickle, ignorant, and can't be trusted. It seems like almost everyone feels this way. So, each individual, with their own needs and desires will elect another individual and hope that somehow their needs and desires will be fulfilled.
If everyone was forced to make a decision on how to run the nation, there would be motivation to make sure that everyone was educated because every individual's decision would affect everyone else. We would be pummeled with brainwashing campaigns and would soon realize how to identify and disregard them (after a few mistakes). There would be a national movement for truth and a promotion of intellectualism. We would be constantly afraid that some group would out-vote our interests. It would be almost a daily competition and your voice would always count. Battle Royal! Doesn't that sound exciting? Doesn't that sound like you have power and freedom?
:mario:
Our existence and social development as a species reminds me of the stock market. It has its ups and downs but is forever moving in an upward trend.
Some see this as a maturing of our species and its societies. We are learning and growing smarter with every new generation. Although there will be 'dips' and not every individual will be a "winner", we will be growing wiser as a species (upward trend).
Sometimes I wonder if this upward trend can be helped or not. Can we find some way of eliminating or decreasing the magnitude of the dips? Whatever happens, it doesn't seem like social progress can be forced.
I also wonder if social progress would somehow be retarded or skewed with the implementation of more licenses and tests. Valuable lessons can be learned from making mistakes. We might need to make them individually and as a society/species in order to grow.
I find it super interesting that people are paranoid of other people (I am too). That is awesome. It's almost like they know that the average person is fickle, ignorant, and can't be trusted. It seems like almost everyone feels this way. So, each individual, with their own needs and desires will elect another individual and hope that somehow their needs and desires will be fulfilled.
If everyone was forced to make a decision on how to run the nation, there would be motivation to make sure that everyone was educated because every individual's decision would affect everyone else. We would be pummeled with brainwashing campaigns and would soon realize how to identify and disregard them (after a few mistakes). There would be a national movement for truth and a promotion of intellectualism. We would be constantly afraid that some group would out-vote our interests. It would be almost a daily competition and your voice would always count. Battle Royal! Doesn't that sound exciting? Doesn't that sound like you have power and freedom?
:mario:
-
Theomanic
-
- Agrees that Reading is Fundamental
- Posts: 298
- Joined: Fri Jan 04, 2008 2:34 pm
- 16
- Location: Toronto, ON
- Has thanked: 4 times
- Been thanked: 24 times
It sounds like you're dreaming of a Utopian nation. You have a lot of assumptions that would be nice, but I doubt would be the way events would unfold. People can hardly be moved to care about voting for the leader of their country, in North America at least. Now the nation is going to shake move in order to educate people so they can vote on the latest traffic bylaw?
The US voted Bush in to power twice. That's all I need to know.
The US voted Bush in to power twice. That's all I need to know.
"Beware those who are always reading books" - The Genius of the Crowd, by Charles Bukowski
-
Penelope
-
- One more post ought to do it.
- Posts: 3267
- Joined: Tue Oct 02, 2007 11:49 am
- 16
- Location: Cheshire, England
- Has thanked: 323 times
- Been thanked: 679 times
- Gender:
Oooh lovely post Mr President!!! I am not being sarcastic. This post filled me with hope....because I know what you mean....and you are only 26 so where is the age gap????
I will keep this image in mind.....because recently I've felt pessimistic....
Thank you.
The human mind is more powerful that we realise......be careful what you feed into it.
It's a spiral....not a mere circle......we are progressing upward, but because it's a spiral...we can't see it.President said:
Our existence and social development as a species reminds me of the stock market. It has its ups and downs but is forever moving in an upward trend.
I will keep this image in mind.....because recently I've felt pessimistic....
Thank you.
The human mind is more powerful that we realise......be careful what you feed into it.
-
President Camacho
-
- I Should Be Bronzed
- Posts: 1655
- Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2008 1:44 pm
- 16
- Location: Hampton, Ga
- Has thanked: 246 times
- Been thanked: 314 times
That's interesting Ophelia, I really didn't think about the voter apathy part of it. This sounds like a very distinct possibility. I think that this could be corrected by still maintaining a functional representative but one that is required to consult what the people want by looking at his "kindle". He wouldn't have to vote the way that the people did (unless there was an overwhelming majority and strong voter turnout) but at the end of his term his votes could be compared to what the people voted for. By doing this it would enable the people to find out if they were truly being represented or not.
I agree that politicians are ignorant on most of the issues they vote on. When congress voted to go into Iraq, the vast majority of congressmen did not look at the National Intelligence Estimate made by the CIA prior to voting. They only scanned through the white house report made by the bush administration. Talk about irresponsible.
Penelope, that was a great post and I totally agree. It seems like image is everything in today's world. I also don't understand why everyone loves hearing about non-pertinent issues such as homosexuality. Who cares? Does it affect how I'm going to get my next meal, put clothes on my back, or find a home if two guys get married? Nooo... but that's just me. People love these scandalous issues... issues which should be kept secret. I don't want to know how you have sex, what you do if you should become pregnant, or what you do with the consent of any other adult. I don't want to know.
I agree that politicians are ignorant on most of the issues they vote on. When congress voted to go into Iraq, the vast majority of congressmen did not look at the National Intelligence Estimate made by the CIA prior to voting. They only scanned through the white house report made by the bush administration. Talk about irresponsible.
Penelope, that was a great post and I totally agree. It seems like image is everything in today's world. I also don't understand why everyone loves hearing about non-pertinent issues such as homosexuality. Who cares? Does it affect how I'm going to get my next meal, put clothes on my back, or find a home if two guys get married? Nooo... but that's just me. People love these scandalous issues... issues which should be kept secret. I don't want to know how you have sex, what you do if you should become pregnant, or what you do with the consent of any other adult. I don't want to know.
