The trouble with direct democracy is that it gives the people what they demand.
Please note that this is never "what they want", "what they ought to have", "what they need", or even "what they ask for, very politely, and in reasonable tones". What the people demand is almost always an overreaction against the very last thing that made them angry, and it's what gave us such wonderful things as laws with mandatory minimum sentences , traffic cops, and the War On Drugs. For a while it got us Prohibition too, and look how that turned out.
No, I'll take "Inefficient Oligarchy" given the option. The Politician Class still bends and sways at the will of the mob, but they know very well what will happen to them if ever they pass a law that proves immediately to be impracticable. They also develop skills in delay, spin, and pseudo-compromise; all these, of course, are aimed at keeping themselves in office, but the fortunate side effect is often that the government limits itself about just how much it hurts the people.
I think of it as "Applying Thumbscrews To Ourselves By Consensus". |
Show Media Item - I would suggest we start a Hillary Camp vs Trump Camp game...
