Really? In a democracy is it really necessary to have representatives when we can all instantly represent ourselves? I've been thinking about this ever since the internet poped up, anyone can instantly communicate with anyone instantly. Why keep such a corrupt, evil system around, when we could create something new that actually reflects the will of the people? In my opinion it is time to get rid of so called representatives and start representing ourselves.
You're viewing a single comment thread. View all comments, or full comment thread.
Comments (20)
sorted by:
Because the people are evil.
This is the problem of government. If we had angels, we can make them kings, but no one is an angel, and God isn't sending any to govern us.
The balance the Founding Fathers advocated for wasn't just a balance of powers, but a system whereby wicked men would find themselves in an impossible position where they cannot advance their interest without advancing the interests of the people at large.
The idea of a representative was that each would come from a community of about 30,000 people. This meant that they would be known by the community. You can't steal these sorts of elections easily, and the power would be distributed among a large group of people, each beholden to their group.
The modern representative represents, on average, about a million people. No one knows who their representatives actually are, and in order to get elected, they need money, and so they can be bought and sold at market prices, just like advertising campaigns.
I would prefer we implement the following changes to our system of government to bring it closer to the balance we had before:
Honestly, we should do something like have 10 families elect a representative, and these representatives do all the work of electing higher officers, judges, etc... You just elect that one person and that's it. That person becomes an expert in the government and works together with their peers to make sure your 10 families are protected.