Who is America ?

[Dan74]

The #1 thing that needs changing, IMO, is people's minds. Awareness of the system, how it is, warts-n-all, and a desire to change. Otherwise nothing is going to budge of course.

Down here, in this 'shit hole' of a country called Switzerland (thanks Amanita), we have the closest thing to a direct democracy - a citizen can initiate a referendum, but collecting enough signatures and then get funding to promote the campaign. A great deal of decisions and changes need to be voted on by the citizens in order to be implemented. A lot of power to the voter, eh? But do people really take advantage of it? For instance, the minimum guaranteed income failed a few years ago with just over a third of the voters supporting it.


Raising awareness is paramount. Otherwise even in the presence of new rights and liberties, we will just continue with the business as usual.

[Malcolm]

Down here, in this 'shit hole' of a country called Switzerland (thanks Amanita), we have the closest thing to a direct democracy

Direct democracy does not scale. In New England, we also have direct democracy at the town level. But get to the county level, it begins to show signs of weakness.

[Grigoris]

Direct democracy does not scale. In New England, we also have direct democracy at the town level. But get to the county level, it begins to show signs of weakness.

It does not scale in nation states. Direct democracy requires a confederate system to function properly. It can work within the context of a confederation, if one takes advantage of current communication technology.

Before "skype conferencing" was available (during the Spanish Civil War, or the Makhnoist liberation of the Ukraine, for example) a community could send a representative to a confederate meeting, but the delegate was not allowed to make decisions on behalf of the community.

But I have to agree with Dan that for a system like this to really work, the citizens have to be aware and willing to cooperate. This (inherent quality to cooperate) is something that requires education/training/encouragement. Just like the (inherent) tendency towards individualism has to be trained and habituated.

[Malcolm]

Direct democracy does not scale. In New England, we also have direct democracy at the town level. But get to the county level, it begins to show signs of weakness.

It does not scale in nation states. Direct democracy requires a confederate system to function properly. It can work within the context of a confederation, if one takes advantage of current communication technology.

Before "skype conferencing" was available (during the Spanish Civil War, or the Makhnoist liberation of the Ukraine, for example) a community could send a representative to a confederate meeting, but the delegate was not allowed to make decisions on behalf of the community.

But I have to agree with Dan that for a system like this to really work, the citizens have to be aware and willing to cooperate. This (inherent quality to cooperate) is something that requires education/training/encouragement. Just like the (inherent) tendency towards individualism has to be trained and habituated.

For Democracy of any legitimate kind to work, the citizenry needs to be literate, educated, interested, and self-informed.

[Malcolm]

Direct democracy does not scale. In New England, we also have direct democracy at the town level. But get to the county level, it begins to show signs of weakness.

It does not scale in nation states. Direct democracy requires a confederate system to function properly. It can work within the context of a confederation, if one takes advantage of current communication technology.

Well, nation states are not going anywhere anytime soon.

[Queequeg]

Direct democracy does not scale. In New England, we also have direct democracy at the town level. But get to the county level, it begins to show signs of weakness.

It does not scale in nation states. Direct democracy requires a confederate system to function properly. It can work within the context of a confederation, if one takes advantage of current communication technology.

Well, nation states are not going anywhere anytime soon.

Stop being practical.

[Grigoris]

Well, nation states are not going anywhere anytime soon.

And that is one of the major sources of our current problems (globally).

[Malcolm]

Well, nation states are not going anywhere anytime soon.

And that is one of the major sources of our current problems (globally).

Not much is going to change, I am afraid. It is a situation we are stuck with for the foreseeable future. The only alternative is to create communities whose decision making operates outside state structures, but parallel with them, in such a way that latter does not see the former as threats.