• cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
    ·
    1 year ago

    Voting is just a component of some democratic systems. There’s a lot more you have to consider. For example, imagine you have a system where people vote for their representatives but the media is owned by the wealthy and political parties depend on wealthy donors for funding. In that case policy will not reflect the interests of the people but instead the interests of a wealthy minority. I imagine that’s the kind of “democracy” the AP is referring to when they describe Jimmy Lai as pro-democracy.

    • SeaJ@lemm.ee
      hexagon
      ·
      1 year ago

      There is no democracy without the general public voting. It is a component of ALL democratic systems.

      What evidence do you have that your scenario is what AP means when they refer to democracy?

      • cecinestpasunbot@lemmy.ml
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        It’s a fair description of the system the British set up in Hong Kong right before they had to hand it back to China. It’s the same system that “pro-democracy” advocates in Hong Kong were defending. As such I think it’s reasonable to assume that’s what the AP and Jimmy Lai are referring to.

        As for voting I’m not saying it isn’t a useful mechanism through which the general will of a population can be expressed. Instead, I am saying that voting alone is not the crux upon which democracy hinges. I personally prefer voting as a mechanism over sortition and consensus in most cases. However, that wouldn’t mean either of those mechanisms couldn’t be the basis for democratic decision making.