If you were classically educated, you’d know the meme is about Sortition vs Elections (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition). The idea is that you can’t have democracy when you have to vote for your representative, because rich families will manipulate the election process. The better solution to pick your Senate would be to randomly select group representatives and have them cooperate.
And that was what Greece philosophers like Aristotle thought ~2300 years ago. Actually all sources we have suggest that Greeks from that era though that elections are undemocratic, and only sortition can provide true democracy.
Seems to be true today when we vote, we pick between turds, and nothing changes for the better. <- and that’s what meme is about
Side note: Carlin was right, you get educated only enough to be able to work for your masters.
How many people looking at that meme even knew about ancient Greeks shitting on elections in favour of sortition and went there, instead of thinking “elections bad? You must want to have a king, you authoritarian swine”
Without elections you get to have kings and emperors. Unless you go full on direct democracy which actually is becoming more feasible thanks to the Internet I guess?
I’m not a USian, but I do know how their jury duty works. Yeah, it’s been over a decade since I last went to history class, I’d completely forgotten about this system and I guess I don’t think outside of the box enough to come up with it myself. There are some negatives I can think of, but some few positives too.
Here’s my biggest concern, and I’m hoping that maybe you have an answer: Outside of the US, MOST people who get into politics are at least decently educated. MOST voters prefer intelligent and well-educated candidates. Most of them, not all of course. If everyone is eligible and there’s no filtering happening, a bunch of honest to god dumbfucks might be chosen by random chance. You COULD give it an education requirement, but then a lot of otherwise intelligent and well-meaning people who didn’t finish school for one reason or another, are disqualified. IQ tests can have unwanted cultural, racial and socioeconomic biases. How do you make sure that there aren’t too many ridiculously unqualified people chosen, without outright imposing requirements that could be unfair?
What is extremist about that?
Yearning for a dictatorship is generally considered an extreme opinion.
If you were classically educated, you’d know the meme is about Sortition vs Elections (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition). The idea is that you can’t have democracy when you have to vote for your representative, because rich families will manipulate the election process. The better solution to pick your Senate would be to randomly select group representatives and have them cooperate.
And that was what Greece philosophers like Aristotle thought ~2300 years ago. Actually all sources we have suggest that Greeks from that era though that elections are undemocratic, and only sortition can provide true democracy.
Seems to be true today when we vote, we pick between turds, and nothing changes for the better. <- and that’s what meme is about
Side note: Carlin was right, you get educated only enough to be able to work for your masters.
How many people looking at that meme even knew about ancient Greeks shitting on elections in favour of sortition and went there, instead of thinking “elections bad? You must want to have a king, you authoritarian swine”
Wanting the 99% in charge as opposed to the current 1% is the opposite of yearning for a dictatorship. That’s yearning for its destruction.
I yearn for direct democracy and self-rule.
Without elections you get to have kings and emperors. Unless you go full on direct democracy which actually is becoming more feasible thanks to the Internet I guess?
The point is that a system where you just vote for a guy every four years won’t change anything because the rich are in charge and have all the power.
Without having the people in power there can’t be democracy.
And what’s the system where people are in power without elections?
Direct democracy. We have the infrastructure and tech to enable this with liquid democracy platforms.
Ancient Greek democracy, where they used https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sortition (picking representatives at random).
If you’re USian, your jury is like sortition.
I’m not a USian, but I do know how their jury duty works. Yeah, it’s been over a decade since I last went to history class, I’d completely forgotten about this system and I guess I don’t think outside of the box enough to come up with it myself. There are some negatives I can think of, but some few positives too.
Here’s my biggest concern, and I’m hoping that maybe you have an answer: Outside of the US, MOST people who get into politics are at least decently educated. MOST voters prefer intelligent and well-educated candidates. Most of them, not all of course. If everyone is eligible and there’s no filtering happening, a bunch of honest to god dumbfucks might be chosen by random chance. You COULD give it an education requirement, but then a lot of otherwise intelligent and well-meaning people who didn’t finish school for one reason or another, are disqualified. IQ tests can have unwanted cultural, racial and socioeconomic biases. How do you make sure that there aren’t too many ridiculously unqualified people chosen, without outright imposing requirements that could be unfair?
Yep. We need direct democracy, using an auditable digital liquid democracy platform.