Date: Mon, 4 Nov 1996 Sender: Peter Schachte <•••@••.•••> Subject: Re: cj#596> re: "What can we do about it all??" > >...I find that the Swiss system of direct democracy is much more >promising and > >can and should be refined, especially now that electronic networks can be > >used. > > Here we have perhaps fundamentally different perspectives. I do > not believe in direct democracy, taken to extremes, for several reasons. > For one thing, direct democracy atomizes the population into a bunch of > individuals, each voting on some issue. This is an ideal scenario for > mass-media manipulation, and indeed experience with the initiative process > often shows that it is more easily manipulated by the elite than even > legislatures are. Sometimes this is true. But when I lived in California I found that fat corporate advertizing campaigns didn't always succeed in swaying voters. Sometimes small popular lobbying groups are able to use the initiative process to make changes they could never have effected by lobbying the corporate-financed legislature. Certainly the mass-media have been successfully used to sway the public on some issues, but this is a danger in representative democracy, too. Already a demagogue can take to the airwaves spreading half-truths about a bill being considered by the legislature, causing an avalanche of popular protest, and finally killing the bill. At least an election campaign (in the US) allows time for a response pointing out the inaccuracies. A demagogue caught out a few times misreporting objective facts will quickly lose his following. > My belief is that the sinew of democracy is not the individual, but > varous kinds of non-governmental organizations and institutions. Things > like churches, unions, parents organizations, associations of all kinds, > etc. These can all be a positive force in a direct democracy, too. People will turn to organizations they respect to decide how to vote on an issue. In this way, leadership is still very important in direct democracy, it's just that it can now come from outside of the government, and from a position one does not need hundreds of thousands or millions of dollars to buy. There's also the tweedle-dum and tweedle-dee effect. It may be harder to avoid polling about an issue, or to arrange that none of the choices are any good, than it is to arrange for both candidates in a representative democracy to have similar views on it. It's hard for me to believe that the US would have its current health care non-system had the people been asked for their views at the polls. Finally, I view the rise of the Internet with some optimisim. Mailing lists like this one, certain news groups, and web pages sprouting up all over the world have the possibility of bringing news and analysis direct and unfiltered to a large segment of the population. This may weaken the grip of the corporate media on the popular mind, allowing a better informed populace to make better choices at the polls. Providing corporations can be prevented from taking control of the Internet. -Peter Schachte URL: http://www.cs.mu.oz.au/~pets/ •••@••.••• PGP: finger pets@128.250.37.150 for key [A computer is] like an Old Testament god, with a lot of rules and no mercy. -- Joseph Campbell ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~ Posted by Richard K. Moore - •••@••.••• - Wexford, Ireland Cyberlib: www | ftp --> ftp://ftp.iol.ie/users/rkmoore/cyberlib ~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~--~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=~
Share: