Talking with each other at the peoples local council not going to a ballot box to elect some stupid bastad to make decisions for them. I DO NOT CONSENT someone to have my all will. An example can enlight this. I vote for the opposite party as an lgbt+ individual but they are not mentioning my daily life problems instead they are making populism with the religion i do not believe.
You may say it is also a democracy by its defination and you are not wrong but the classical democracy is tyrant of the mass. I want the mass to be knitted for the minority. Just because we are the less should not mean that our opinions matter less. But under the classical democracy it is. Under the classical democracy homophobes are the majority and lgbt+ people are the minority.
You’re describing Direct Democracy vs Representative Democracy. Direct Democracy is what we also saw in places like Athens or ancient Greece, where all of the individuals came together and voted collectively on making decisions.
Representative Democracy is what we have in the US today with elected officials.
Direct Democracy is a lot more difficult to implement unless countries become smaller imo, although in the digital age it could be made more possible. Plus there’s the matter of maintaining a militia, although maybe we just expand the current version of the UN’s military budget in that case.
I feel that under Direct Democracy you would still have the issue of bigots outnumbering you in certain areas but not so in others.
The issue with the US’ representative system is that we artificially capped the amount of seats for the House of Representatives and even the Senate so that land has more power than people. If the House was uncapped Federally, and the even the Senate, then people living in Blue/densely populated states would have more fair representation.
I know it is more like comparing direct democracy and representative democracy but i also do have some anarchist, individualist opinions/beliefs. So i am not very certain about calling anarchy as direct democracy. tho i believe democracy under anarchy which is without hierarchy can be used as tool to decide and argue about something.
I am not from usa i am from turkey. English is my second language.
I’m not certain how you would classify that either. When I hear the word anarchy I think more ‘Wild West’ or ‘outlaw country’.
I’m pessimistic about good coming from anarchy in the long-run. To me it sounds like disorganized bands of communities. Without some sort of organizing or structure then I feel it makes it much more difficult to deal with natural disasters, famines, or antagonists.
I feel that in the case of Turkey I don’t know enough about the specifics of your country to comment on ways it could be improved politically to bring about good governance. I feel it’s still possible in my country, but from what I have heard Turkey leans more conservatively.
WinGirl99@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 hours ago
Talking with each other at the peoples local council not going to a ballot box to elect some stupid bastad to make decisions for them. I DO NOT CONSENT someone to have my all will. An example can enlight this. I vote for the opposite party as an lgbt+ individual but they are not mentioning my daily life problems instead they are making populism with the religion i do not believe.
You may say it is also a democracy by its defination and you are not wrong but the classical democracy is tyrant of the mass. I want the mass to be knitted for the minority. Just because we are the less should not mean that our opinions matter less. But under the classical democracy it is. Under the classical democracy homophobes are the majority and lgbt+ people are the minority.
frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 4 hours ago
You’re describing Direct Democracy vs Representative Democracy. Direct Democracy is what we also saw in places like Athens or ancient Greece, where all of the individuals came together and voted collectively on making decisions.
Representative Democracy is what we have in the US today with elected officials.
Direct Democracy is a lot more difficult to implement unless countries become smaller imo, although in the digital age it could be made more possible. Plus there’s the matter of maintaining a militia, although maybe we just expand the current version of the UN’s military budget in that case.
I feel that under Direct Democracy you would still have the issue of bigots outnumbering you in certain areas but not so in others.
The issue with the US’ representative system is that we artificially capped the amount of seats for the House of Representatives and even the Senate so that land has more power than people. If the House was uncapped Federally, and the even the Senate, then people living in Blue/densely populated states would have more fair representation.
WinGirl99@lemmy.blahaj.zone 4 hours ago
I know it is more like comparing direct democracy and representative democracy but i also do have some anarchist, individualist opinions/beliefs. So i am not very certain about calling anarchy as direct democracy. tho i believe democracy under anarchy which is without hierarchy can be used as tool to decide and argue about something.
I am not from usa i am from turkey. English is my second language.
frostedtrailblazer@lemmy.zip 4 hours ago
I’m not certain how you would classify that either. When I hear the word anarchy I think more ‘Wild West’ or ‘outlaw country’.
I’m pessimistic about good coming from anarchy in the long-run. To me it sounds like disorganized bands of communities. Without some sort of organizing or structure then I feel it makes it much more difficult to deal with natural disasters, famines, or antagonists.
I feel that in the case of Turkey I don’t know enough about the specifics of your country to comment on ways it could be improved politically to bring about good governance. I feel it’s still possible in my country, but from what I have heard Turkey leans more conservatively.