DIRECT DEMOCRACY
QUESTION: Mr. Armstrong,
You wrote a few times in both blogs about “trying Direct Democracy” lately.
I can see how powerful technology capacity currently available can support such change.
What I have problems to envision is how the mechanic would work integrating local, city, regional, county, provincial, state, and country various levels of concerns.
What most jurisdiction have today is some form of top-down approach which leaves the people out of any decision.
Direct Democracy would be a revolution by itself turning around the whole thing 180 degree!!!
Could it possibly work for the entire planet to address issues such as climate change, poverty, rogue regime, migration, etc. ?
Time permitted, I would like to read your thoughts about the concept in the 21st century.
Thanks for your enlightening work,
LT
Toronto, Canada
REPLY: If we can buy online with no problem, we should be able to vote the same way. You then cross-reference each vote to the tax database. If they never filed a tax form, then they cannot vote. Locally, it can be linked to your local tax records since we have direct taxation. Those who do not have a computer can do so from their phone or go to the public town hall. Without direct democracy, there will be no trust in government ever again. That is a death blow to the system we now have.
Switzerland has the closest thing to a direct democracy so far.
There are three instruments of direct democracy; all types of referendums: mandatory, popular initiative, and optional. A vote must be held on any amendment to the constitution resulting in a mandatory referendum. A double majority, meaning the consent of a majority of the people and of the cantons, is required to amend the country’s constitution.
Citizens can launch a popular initiative to demand a change to the constitution. Any Swiss citizen who is eligible to vote can sign a popular initiative and a group of at least seven citizens (the initiative committee) can launch their own popular initiative. Before a vote is held on a popular initiative, the initiative committee must collect 100,000 valid signatures in favor of the proposal within a period of 18 months.
The Federal Council and Parliament will recommend whether the proposal should be accepted or rejected. For the proposal to be accepted, a double majority is needed. If it is accepted, new legislation or an amendment to the existing legislation is normally required to implement the new constitutional provision.
Other nations can change their constitutions on a vote of the representative and the people never are even asked. That to me is a very dangerous distinction. For example, in Canada, they passed an act whereby the representatives can cancel all currency at their pleasure and force the people into digital currency. The people are NEVER consulted. That is not democracy. It is tyranny.
