Democracy; representative or direct

Our representative democracy seems pretty flaccid lately. This is having a worldwide impact. This article sums it up nicely. It mentions that direct democracy is positioned second to representative democracy. What do you think of a direct democracy? LINK

A direct democracy is the quickest way to become a third world nation. We had the best system in the world. Built upon thousands of years of historical trials and errors. Once we got a system built upon the Rules of Laws, 180 nations followed us.

Our nation has never been perfect. Back in 1977 we got away from the Rules of Law system and then in 1984 a bad ruling by the Supreme Court created the pathway for the building of the swamp. The Dark State then formed as a branch of the Swamp and here we are years later. Every year digging the hole we are in deeper and deeper.

When your car has a flat tire. You don’t trade it for a horse and buggy. You fix the flat. And that’s what we need to do.

The problem seems to be that people in general don’t know how to fix a flat. People that are interested in the problem are the constitutionalists who understand how the Rules of Laws work. They call the problem the “Chevron deference”. Where most of the general public that understands the problem calls it the Swamp.

Right now, the case to watch that could weaken the Chevron doctrine is called - Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo.

Almost all the problems we are having today can be directly related to the Swamp.

1 Like

I like that, but our representative democracy is not representative of our population. For example, if we had a direct democracy, abortion would be legal, and assault rifles would be banned. Of course this would be true if our representatives were representative.

True, if your car has a flat. But what if the engine falls to the ground in a pile of rust? The tea party began as a group of conservative extremists and has grown into MAGA. Seems worse than a flat.

It’s often confusing when people discuss the “swamp” or “dark/deep state” since each party seems to define the terms as “those stupid” dems or reps.
I’m assuming you want Chevron to be upheld (as do I). It is the first step to letting science serve government. I do understand the fishermen’s issue but overturning Chevron is not the way to solve it.

1 Like

Mike, you excel at obfuscation.

1 Like

Direct democracy is the only true democracy but it is extremely rare. A quick search shows Liechtenstein and Switzerland with some limited direct democracy. I suspect the reason it’s so rare is because it only works in small, rural, homogenous populations. For most of the world, it’s out of the question.

Before the bolcheviks imposed their dictatorship, Soviets tried democracy at the local level, villages or factories. It did not really work as very fast only the motivated militant were able to attend the too long and too frequent meetings.

In France, we have production workers cooperative societies. the workers own the firm.

They practice a semi direct democratic system, with periodic assemblies to decide the main options, elect and check the managers. It work rather well in small structures.

Anarchists dream of a society of councils managing small local structures.

Did everyone notice that trick?? When the working class rule its a dictatorship but when the ruling class rule its a democracy!!! Quite impressive Morgan

The bolcheviks were not the ruling class. They were one of the revolutionary movements, among others, Mencheviks, Social Revolutionnaries, and Anarchists included.

In January 1918, the Bolcheviks disbanded the Constituent assembly, in which they were a minority, by strength.

In 1918/1919, the Soviets government, Congress of Soviets et Executive committee, were deprived of any power, and URSS became a one party state. Red terror, meaning PCUS terror, was instituted.

In 1921, the Kronstadt sailors revolted asking reduction in Bolshevik power, newly elected soviets (councils) to include socialist and anarchist groups, economic freedom for peasants and workers, dissolution of the bureaucratic governmental organs created during the civil war, and the restoration of civil rights for the working class.

They were crushed in blood !!!

And don’t tell they were allied to White Russians, or counter revolutionaries, it would be a lie.

Oh my god!!! I cant believe thats your comprehension from what i said.

Well, the Russian proletariat was no more the ruling class when the bolchevik imposed their dictatorship. And that’s a fact.

So, I agree with @thatoneguy that a direct democracy is a “true” democracy but it does have practical issues. First, there would be an unmanageable number of issues to vote on. Second, some votes are national while others are state or county. Third, how do we get the votes of over 350 million people routinely for the myriad topics?

Those issues should be handled well by a representative democracy. But mixing democracy with capitalism shifts purposes from serving the people to serving oneself by accumulating money and power that no longer serves the citizens.

So what are the best ways to rescue a representative democracy once money has corrupted it? I remember a mailing I received that asked for a donation to get money out of politics. While I applaud the motive, there simply aren’t enough dollars in ordinary citizens’s pockets to counter Koch, et. al. But I don’t see a way out of this when so much of our population is convinced by the wealthy liars to actually vote against themselves.

I remember a SF novel, which described a system in which each voter has a chip card.

At any time, he can vote for any proposition, or against it, currently being examined by parliament.

And to have voting power in parliament, you must be supported by a fixed number of voters. At any time, an elector may take off, or switch his support to a MP.

I don’t advocate such a system, but it could give ideas.

1 Like


I still think we have a pretty good system, it’s the people trying to destroy that system from within that are the problem. And the apathetic lazy American citizens not upholding their end of the Democracy Contract (that being: Informed and Engaged)

In about 1977, in Appenzell, Switzerland I got to witness the practice of Direct Democracy and see first hand why it can get complicated in a hurry. My uncle was a naturalized Swiss citizen and in the national militia, so was eligible. His wife, the born Swiss citizen, still wasn’t able to vote until 1971, about 6 years before my visit.

In those days the cordoned off voters block was probably a quarter (or less) of what this 2013ish event needed. Oh why couldn’t we slow down our baby making, bad business all around.

1 Like

That’s cool. (the vid can’t be viewed directly here, but the “watch on youtube” works fine.)

Wife and I are going to Switzerland in June. We’ll go by train through most of the country. Then we’re going north to Germany to board the Viking river cruise on the Rhine.

Sweet! Do enjoy. If you find yourself on Susten Pass (Berner Oberland region)
You’ll have to share a picture, I spent the summer of 1976 up at the top of the pass (working & living) - almost killed myself trying to climb mountain face to the east of the restaurant at the top. Those days the glaciers were significantly bigger. Awesome time!

Also biked along the Rhine River from Bodensee to Koblenz (not that summer). Yeah, young and free as a bird and taking advantage of it. Thanks for the flashbacks.

1 Like

Ha. That was our second choice, but we went with the Danube. I have only been to Greece, so, kinda excited.

1 Like

This is key. If you want democracy small is best, along with homogenous.

Greed has always been a problem. The Egyptian system handled greed better and longer than any other system in history. Point being, it can be handled.

To rescue our system. We must get it back on track. In our system the legislative branch is to create the laws. Departments are now creating more laws (Rules/Regulations) than the legislative.

Next the executive branch is to enforce the laws by using the Rules of Law. But rules and regulations do not fall under the judicial branch quite the same as the Rules of Law.

Agencies are created through their own organic statutes, which establish new laws, and in doing so, create the respective agencies to interpret, administer, and enforce those new laws. administrative law | Wex | US Law | LII / Legal Information Institute

Regulations are published by executive branch agencies to clarify their interpretation of a law and how a law will be implemented. Regulations also state requirements or prohibitions.

Can federal agencies make their own rules and prosecute those who violate the rules?

Usually, the agency will have all three kinds of power: executive, legislative, and judicial. (That is, the agency can set the rules that business must comply with, can investigate and prosecute those businesses, and can hold administrative hearings for violations of those rules. Chapter 5: Administrative Law › s08-administrative-law

This gets back to the 1984 “Chevron deference”. The Supreme Court was to maybe look at taking this up for a ruling this last January. Looks like it’s not going to happen yet. The Court has got to make a ruling before the country declines to the point of us losing control of the safe haven currency. Point being. Let’s get back to the US Constitution.

Coffee, sorry didn’t get back to you sooner on the earlier posts. Had the internet knocked off. I live in CA. The phone company here will only deal with wireless phones because of wire theft. The railroad has been trying to stop the theft of heat sensors along the tracks. And now the main fiber optic cables cut in four different areas. Figure that one out.

Well, with powerful lobbyists buying politicians at every level I much prefer to trust the agencies (EPA, etc.) to understand what rules/regs are needed and to enforce them.
So, do you want SCOTUS to uphold Chevron? Or no.

1 Like

Agreed, it is not. Never was meant to be a populist movement. The representatives make the laws. Same as when the public goes to court. You should be represented by a lawyer. Sometimes you may not agree with your lawyer.
How did the Venezuela government’s direct democracy work out? Maduro used the desires of the population to rid competition, rid guns. Increase health care and other government handouts until he couldn’t borrow anymore.
Then inflation took over. The richest county in South America became a disaster. And is now tied with Suriname for title of the poorest country in SA. Their banning of firearms to lower crime rates, how did that really work out?

Are you sure it is abortion that is the problem for a lot of the voters. Myself, I’m for abortion but will vote against abortion because most of the time the taxpayers end up paying for abortions. As far as guns. I don’t want to give up my second amendment rights. I believe people should have rights, not the government’s elite caste system.

Agree. With the swamp it is almost impossible for a representative to operate in DC. Watch some of the House hearings. A Rep. will ask department heads a question. And get jerked around. Will ask why the Departments won’t give them data they have been asking for a couple of years and again get the run-a-round. The FBI year after year has been breaking the law hundreds of thousands of times and they just get an increase in budget. One hell of a broken system.
It didn’t use to be that way when congress made the laws. I heard one Rep. saying that the laws congress made last year were a one-inch-high paper stack. The laws made by the swamp were twenty-one feet high. The people making the laws are not the representatives anymore. And some of the laws that Congress does makes are useless if the departments don’t follow those laws. The departments decide what party or leadership they want to follow. The departments decide who is good or bad and what information you should be allowed to hear.

If the engine fails, then you’ll be using a horse and buggy. What you are calling conservative extremists look to me like people that are against being ruled by the Swamp. Tell me how many laws were made last year and who made those laws. And you’re worried about MAGA. Should be worried about the Swamp.
Years ago, the monopolies and bankers had more control than the Swamp does right now. And the people got the control back. It took a couple decades and a lot of hard times.

The Swamp is nonpartisan.
Years back we had Ralph Nader who fought big business and helped get the OSHA, EPA, and the Consumer Product Safety Commission going. These departments helped balance the scale for the working man against Corporations. We had stuff like smog, acid rain, and the environment being polluted. Example, NY City would dump city trash on a big barge. Then bulldozers on the barge would push the trash into the ocean.
These new departments started winning some cases against powerful corporations. So, the corps got lobbyists and politicians. Then a few years later we had trouble with chicken. People were dying from salmonella from one of the biggest producers. Now all chicken has salmonella. It is the amount that is troublesome. Congress thought that we needed a system that could respond to help the government departments go after these big corporations to save lives. The chicken producers were within the laws and had people in DC. So, no one could go after the producers.
It was decided that the departments had the scientists and expertise to write regulations that could control problems like salmonella outbreaks and save lives right away whereas congress could take years.
Over time, the departments were developing their own legal meanings of what words mean and becoming very powerful. One department went after Chevron with regulations. Chevron took the case to the Supreme Court because the regulations were written by the departments and Congress was the only one that was supposed to be able to write laws. The departments would write the regulations and then congress would approve them. The problem was that year after year the departments would get Congress to OK little, tiny changes in the laws. These little, tiny changes would end up changing the law quite a bit over time. Chevron pointed this out to the Supreme Court. The Court ruled on the side of the departments. Thus, the Swamp was born in 1984.
The Swamp can be any business or representative backing department made laws. The deep state is Departments that follow secret laws and courts that are kept from the public. The dark state is the network of officials, private firms, think tanks, media outlets, foundations, NGO’s interest groups that operate in non-transparency to the general public pushing political interest. Example, the laptop being Russian collusion was the Swamp, Deep State, and Dark State working together to keep information from the American people.

We need Chevron overturned so the Rules of Law are working properly. Letting departments become their own government is not working at all. Science has become too political to trust anymore. We need to give the legislative power back to our representatives so our government will once again be a representative democracy.