In my younger days I thought direct democracy was unworkable, but now I realise that might have just been my brain conforming to the bourgeois representative government status quo.
Obviously we easily have the tech to do DD these days, everyone has a smart phone in their pocket, we could do it instantly and on the go. But how you could manage a planned economy that way I’m not sure.
I still like the idea of "liquid democracy," where representatives are elected to a representative body, but instead of getting one vote they get as many votes as people they represent -- and any person can override any vote cast on their behalf by their representative through a parallel direct-democracy vote.
Of course I'm aware that it's basically impossible without internet voting, vulnerable to propaganda, glorifies individuality to a creepy extent, and is just about the most lib idea ever. But I still like it for some reason.
tbh a rational society would have put into place the infrastructure for secure and accessible internet voting decades ago.
super interesting idea
The "individualism/collectivism" dichotomy is what's liberal, not the glorification of individual freedom itself. Individual freedom is a good concept that's perverted by almost everyone who uses it.
edit: perverted by being positioned against the collectivist boogeyman
I guess what I mean is that the idea seems to appeal to the instinct that "all those other people can have someone else vote for them, but you’re an extra-special boy who can cast their own vote." Of course anyone could be that extra-special boy in theory, but the logistics of actually doing it in an informed way would seem to put a lie to that.
But even still it seems to be better than just a representative or just direct democracy (maybe especially for smaller groups). I don’t know; I just like it.