488
yup (thelemmy.club)
submitted 13 hours ago by to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world
26 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 16 points 12 hours ago* (7 children)

Sounds like an awful idea. Direct democracy on specific policies is a fucking nightmare. I want actually informed and knowledgeable people making decisions on shit.

Yeah, sounds great in theory if everyone was as autistic as I am. But I don't want policies on healthcare and vaccines being decided on by the average uninformed click of some average idiot with a smartphone app.

"Ask the audience" works until you have a question that requires actual expertise.

I get your frustration with capital corruption and influence. But you're not thinking this through.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
    •
  • [–] 2 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

    I don't want to throw away my vote after elections
    I got lied to too often.

    I want to be included in decisions that concern me - other decisions only concerns other people, I don't need to be involved in everything, but I want to keep my vote

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 8 points 12 hours ago

    Agreed. I don’t have the time nor interest to be appropriately informed on all judicial matters. I would like though to vote in someone that is and that shares my ideals, so they can represent me appropriately. What we should get is corporations and lobbying out of politics

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 9 hours ago

    Yeah, imagine having to regularly vote on something like "Art. 2.17b GCrL shall be amended to exclude entities as described under Art. 90 IndRegR". Didn't vote? Oops, that one made it functionally impossible to sue companies for negligence. And the one almost identical-sounding one next to it would've lowered your tax burden by 5%.

    A state is a hideously complex thing and I don't want to have to care about how the Regulation on the Valuation of Asset-Backed Financial Instruments in the Leasing Sector (1987) works or how paragraph 3 of the MONKEEZ Act potentially conflicts with TRIPS.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 6 hours ago (1 child)

    You lack imagination. I'm seeing a system where you can change the party you vote for at any time. Not knowledgeable on a topic? Leave it to the people you trust most. But if certain policies are interesting it should be possible to intervene at will.

    If people decide on topics they have no clue on that's their right and no worse than voting the wrong parties.

    One problem i'm seeing is, people might vote shortsighted like brexit. But i'm seeing parties all over europe only thinking within their legislature too so no loss.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago

    Not knowledgeable on a topic? Leave it to the people you trust most.

    That's not what people do.

    But if certain policies are interesting it should be possible to intervene at will.

    No, it shouldn't. I can find vaccines "interesting". I shouldn't have a say in whether a new vaccine is safe or not. That decision should be left to experts in that field.

    I don't lack imagination. You are lacking any understanding of how policy is created and how governments function.

    It's such a stupid idea that I've heard this "app based direct democracy" multiple times from the dumbest fucking guys at bars. This is the equivalent of "we just need crypto" solution to problems with banking a capital. Ironically, if we had this type of direct democracy, you'd have the most popular policies be more and more dumb "easy to understand" solutions like the one you are presenting.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent