As kids, we’re told only people who go to college/university for politics/economics/law are qualifiable to make/run a country. As adults, we see no nation these “qualified” adults form actually work as a nation, with all manifesto-driven governments failing. Which to me validates the ambitions of all political theorist amateurs, especially as there are higher hopes now that anything an amateur might throw at the wall can stick. Here’s my favorite from a friend.

  • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’ve played around with the idea of a very ‘direct’ democracy, where effectively, all citizens have an app and are constantly and directly “engaged” in the process. I was imagining it as being a replacement for a local government. If you don’t want to be involved, you can transfer your vote to someone you trust in the system (and take it back whenever you like). The discussions would all be open and traceable, but the votes would be pseudo anonymized.

    That way if its not your thing or you aren’t interested, you can just hand your vote to someone else and let them manage it for you (kind-of like current political parties or representatives), but take it back at will.

    I think we suffer from a lack of civil engagement, and I get tired of people who refuse to put in the work blaming “da gubberment” for things. This system would effectively require them to engage at least some level. And if they complain about “the potholes” not getting fixed, well, there is a no excuse for not knowing why they arent getting fixed. I think we all need to take more responsibility for the world we live in.

      • TropicalDingdong@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 month ago

        Yeah exactly. Like maybe there is some policy on housing I like your position on, so I can delegate my vote to you on this matter. But maybe I have a background in climate and focus on those issues, and hold delegates for that specific domain.

        Its like, an actual use case for crypto blockchain (not as money, but as ledger).

        Maybe you could organize a company/ cooperative this way?

        • otp@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          I feel like that’d just move lobbying from governments to people. So there’d be far more propaganda and garbage. Politicians would be becoming “power delegates”, collecting as many people’s votes as possible. Then we’d end up with another representative democracy (or whatever it’s called to vote for people who then vote for policies)

    • VelvetStorm@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      This sounds good until you think about the reality of it. People will force partners and adult kids who financially depend on them to vote how they want. Then you have the rich and wealthy who will just pay people to vote on something the way they want.

      In theory, this sounds great, but the reality of it would be bad.

      • boatswain@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Don’t even need to bring force into it. Can you imagine “I’ll give you $20 if you transfer your vote on issue X to me”? Seems like it’s basically just handing the government to the billionaire class even more than we already do.

    • 777@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      I have been thinking about this idea for some time also but a couple of things have always bugged me-

      Firstly, how does this interact with privacy? For vote delegation to work, I think the votes would have to be public, or you can’t make a decision on who to delegate your vote to- someone could claim to have one set of views but vote contrary to that. People could come under pressure to vote one way or another.

      Also, who crafts the legislation that is voted on? How do you prevent bill rolling (two unrelated ideas are boiled down to a single binary choice) and splitting (a new service is voted through but the taxes to fund it are not)?

      You said local government at least so a national or state government could help craft these things, but what if the proposed legislation doesn’t actually hurt local people, but doesn’t take into account the actual problems they have locally? For example, what if it would help to allow building in a particular area, but the state government doesn’t know that and it never becomes a priority?