top | item 33364990

(no title)

Direct democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

tyranny of the masses is equally as bad as tyranny of the one especially considering how tribalistic people are.

That's why the framers of the Constitution decided against what you're proposing.

as to the right size question. there is no right size. it's totally arbitrary. States are what we have and that's fine.

discuss

Direct democracy can come with and without a constitution that says the wolves cannot eat the sheep. I like the version with the constitution.

"Tyranny of the masses" is a red-herring. If your constitution (and its enforcement mechanisms) are good, the masses can't do anything to the minorities other than make them irritated (which is a condition we all live in from time to time). And if your constitution isn't good, then your "republic-not-a-democracy" is going to suck for some (or even all) people, too.

I don't agree that there are "no right sizes". I do agree that we don't know what they are yet.

States are not what we have, states are one-sized thing that we have, but we also have villages, towns, cities, counties and even in some cases and for some purposes, regions. And while you may think that its fine, others do not.