Direct Democracy states:I am in favor of direct of democracy, but it should be known all human organizations need leaders. The Greeks would say, these were people chosen by the gods, and not everyone chosen by the gods answers the call, as most humans rather be as content cattle.
"comprises a form of democracy and theory of civics wherein sovereignty is lodged in the assembly of all citizens who choose to participate."
For those who don't want to participate, they really have no say, very much like representational. This method of democracy allows for an enticement to make people want to get involved.
Therefore those who wish to remain as cattle can, while those who want direct input can.
And in Democracy, I don't feel leaders are required.... leaders are required for communism and dictatorships, all that is needed in democracy is someone to organize the system and do what everybody wants them to do..... they can speak for the people of a nation when talking to other nations, but the decisions don't need to be made by this same person..... in a sense, this person could be a leader, but the power remains directly in the hands of the people. This person can inform the public of the pros and cons.... be used as a teacher/educator of each situation (So long as they remain unbiased) and then the people can make informed decisions.
Another example if you like, would be when I actually held some interest in one paticular politician and felt he could actually make a difference. His name was Mike Turner and had quite the big mouth and lots of opinions against the major parties. He cause a lot of stirring about in the Conservative party and voiced his displeasure in some of the things the party was doing. I emailed him and his site, talked to other members on his site, replied to his blogs, shared my views, etc..... he also brought up the concept of Digital Democracy to help improve the current system.I keep proding you about your political activity, because if you want to participate more in governing decisions you can. I think you choose not to be involved and get some pleasure out of attacking an imaginary beast. Nothing is keeping you, or anyone else, from being more involved. People just choose not to be involved.
^ He eventually got booted out of the party and became an independant. After boasting about how great it is to be an independant and how he could represent people better outside of a party and after bashing both the Liberals and Conservatives...... he then joined the Liberals and completely switched his tone in an about face...... and of course those who expressed their dislike about him doing this and joining the Liberals..... they, including myself, got ignored and eventually banned from his site.
Not because we got offensive or threatened him..... it was because he didn't want to answer the questions brought to him..... just like every other goon in the government today..... they'll be your frind only when you agree with their point of view.
I have also sent plenty of feedback to other members and parties here where I live, and I have at least tried to get involved in this corrupt system for the last 8 years.
It doesn't take even 5 years to realize how corrupt this system is. The party I voted for sends me letters and polls to fill out and give feedback on, but when it comes right down to crunch time.... they usually either crumble to what the other parties want, or they just "Didn't have time to bring it up."
I know all of this and it would be nice if you stopped assuming everything about me and my experience.In a city of several thousand people, when our legislators come to speak to us, those who care enough to communicate with them, can all fit in a relative small room. Out of this small group of people, may 4 or 5 really want more to do than attend these hearings. And city counsel meetings are often boring as hell, as they involve many little decisions, most of us don't care about. The truth is, most of us are glad to leave the governing up to a handful of people. I think it is those who make no effort at all to participate in the governing and policy making process, who are most apt to argue for direct democracy, because they do not know the reality of the decision making process. It is not as easy as pushing a bottom on your cell phone.
And just because you may feel fine being cattle or sheep, doesn't mean all of us do.... and most of us don't see the logic in getting involved into a system that is setup to work only for one or two parties, not the people.
And when you use examples such as the above in regards to how few goto these meetings, you sound like you are trying to use examples of Representational government to explain away Direct, which makes no sense.
The reason why very few attend these meetings is the same reason why so few turn out to vote..... because the system isn't trusted, the system is flawed and the system is setup so that the people don't make any important decisions and are illusioned into thinking they have any real serious input.