It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Demarchy: A way to fix America's problems?

page: 1
3

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 04:28 AM
link   
I was reading about a form of Democracy known as Demarchy. It would elminate political parties and forcing people to be pressured while in the political process of running for government.



Demarchy or lottocracy is a political system run by randomly selected decision makers who have been selected by lot. These groups, sometimes termed "policy juries," "citizens' juries," or "consensus conferences," deliberately make decisions about public policies in much the same way that juries decide criminal cases.

Demarchy could also replace traditional political parties. Since people are randomly selected to act as representatives, there is very little chance that the person involved is part of a "party political machine." While random selection will not remove political bias, what it will do is select a person as a representative who has not had to compromise their own beliefs in order to gain political alliances and support.

Institutional corruption (such as a person being supported by businesses in order for both to mutually benefit from the situation) is also unlikely—any corruption would occur after the person is selected and is more likely to be reported (since the person selected would probably not be used to corruption at that scale).

Many politicians make decisions based not necessarily upon what is the best thing to do, nor upon their own ethics and morals, but upon what is best for their own political gain. A politician is dependent upon his or her good standing with voters, as well as an ability to "fit in" with the party political structure. Since a person's time in politics sometimes is short, it is only natural that they do everything possible to continue their career.


en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 04:31 AM
link   
You know i had thought about this a while back.

so that's what its called... demogarchy...

i don't like the name, sound like oligarchy, and right now that's what were against aren't we?



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 04:33 AM
link   
Would everyone be included and what about the really dumb people? No offence but some people you just would not want to have there finger on the button if you know what I mean. I do find it interesting and I am going to look into it more thanks for the info.


Also what about conflict of interests? And would you need to have affirmative action?

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Subjective Truth]



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 04:53 AM
link   

Originally posted by Subjective Truth
Would everyone be included and what about the really dumb people? No offence but some people you just would not want to have there finger on the button if you know what I mean. I do find it interesting and I am going to look into it more thanks for the info.


Also what about conflict of interests? And would you need to have affirmative action?

[edit on 15-2-2010 by Subjective Truth]


I am sure we would have some sort of system or 'checks and balances' to rule people out that are not compitent enough to run our government. Not exactly sure what you mean about conflict of interest. And we would only need affirmative action if the people running government voted to approve affirmative action.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 05:30 AM
link   


I am sure we would have some sort of system or 'checks and balances' to rule people out that are not compitent enough to run our government.


So everyone's equal, but some are more equal than others.

An example: If the test was to spell 'competent' correctly, then you failed the test(This was not meant as an attack, but rather a point of thought).

Be careful who you exclude, someone else might exclude you.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 06:38 AM
link   
Remember the computerized voting scandal in the 2004 election?

This "solution" could be much, much worse.

The Diebold Factor



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 07:09 AM
link   
reply to post by Misoir
 


That would never work. People selected at random to govern? Want to talk about things never getting done! What makes us think that people randomly selected to govern would actually go and do it? People can't even stand doing jury duty today; they're always trying to find a way out of it. Besides, it people actually wanted to be directly involved in the political process, they would probably just run today. Know what I mean?

Also, it think it's funny that the snippet says that corruption is much likely to be reported. I don't think so. Larges sums of cash would be enough to make anyone shut up and do what rich uncle Pennybags wants.



posted on Feb, 15 2010 @ 09:14 AM
link   
Sounds interesting, but the simple truth is that we as humans have just not come up with a good way to run a large country without either 1) losing control to elitists or 2) subjecting the populace to strict and crippling loss of freedoms.

I've said it before, the best way to manage a territory the size of the US is to collapse the federal system to a mere bookkeeping entity. It would handle a bare minimum amount of laws to keep the peace. Leave the balance in the hands of the states and local governments. I also feel that we need a public referendum system in place at all levels of government. Prohibit Congress from making any laws that directly benefit Congressional members and only allow things like Congressional pay raises, etc., to be passed through public referrendum.

Ok, so the ideas are rough.. needing a bit of work, but just throwing it out there.







 
3

log in

join