PLYMCO_PILGRIM
Gold Member
You really want a direct democracy where the mob rules and the minority's rights aren't protected at all?
Direct Democracy is the complete opposite of America's founding and what makes America a great nation.
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what is for dinnner......." -Thomas Jefferson
The parts of the Constitution that protect the rights of minorities and those parts that specify how legislation is arrived at are completely separate. If we did have a direct democracy, it would involve replacing Article II, not the Bill of Rights. A law passed by the People's Virtual Assembly would be subject to the same restrictions as laws currently passed by Congress, e.g. it could not respect an establishment of religion or restrict the free exercise thereof, or abridge freedom of speech or the press or the right of the people peacefully to assemble, etc.
As for the quote by Jefferson, first, it goes against most of what Jefferson himself said and did, which for the most part promoted democracy, and secondly sheep always outnumber wolves. Those who object to democracy are usually wolves worried about being forced into vegetarianism, who only pretend to be sheep worried about becoming dinner.
The problem with direct democracy (as opposed to representative democracy) up to this time is that it has been unworkable, not that it would violate the rights of minorities. Government derives its powers from the consent of the governed, and the people can only give their consent at the speed of communication. It's impossible to have the American people all crowd physically into a room and discuss issues, so we do it by proxy. But thanks to the Internet, it is now possible for the people to discuss issues in a virtual room.
Whether that will result in replacement of representative with direct democracy in the near future remains quite uncertain, but what is bound to happen is that we will see more direct democracy on a sub-governmental level, and more activities such as Occupy arising from democratic interchanges online.
That is all good but it still doesn't dispel the fact that the minority won't be protected under a direct democracy, even by the constition.
Say 51% of americans want to open up all sensitive lands in the united states to fossil fuel development................well that stinks for those, who are currently in the minority right now, who would try to stop it from happening (such as the pipeline)
With a direct democracy that oil pipeline would already be being built along with a giant wall along our souther border........with a constitutional republic howerver the minority's position in both those areas is protected.