The Futures of Democracy
Democracy seems to be working out badly nowadays with the rise of Trump and far-right parties all over the world, but i'm going to keep this fairly optimistic and say that Democracy could be a lot more engaging than it currently is, and i mean that. With the current rise in Technology and the popularity of the Internet, showing up to polling station once every few years could be a thing of the past. With these possible changes to Democracy we could re-engage the disengage and get politicians into power that do represent at least a majority of the the populous. I won't include Direct Democracy in this post, since i did it in my post about 2 days ago, which i'll link to at the end of this one if you wanna scan that one. So here are a few ways that we could change democracy around the world with our current technology, and not all of these are just to do with how we vote in Politicians but how we run our whole Economies.
-- E-Democracy --
E-Democracy is becoming ever so largely popular amongst young people, especially those working within the IT Sector, the idea being that we could get rid of polling stations and vote from the comfort of our own homes. It's not just down to making us lazy, but we could vote whilst we are at work, out with our kids, it could be a solution for the part of the population too ill to leave their home or hospital to go and physically vote. Now, i understand that there are some reading this saying "but with hackers in other countries, aren't you just opening us up for more rigged systems" on the front of it this is a major issue that needs addressed, and one solution is to run the servers that managed the voting on Quantum Computers, that are almost impossible to hack, in order to hack them you need very sophisticated technology, and by that you'd need another quantum computer to do it in the first place, and there's not many of those around so finding out whose tried to rig the system wouldn't be that difficult to do. I also did a post on the Project Cybersyn that was a Historical project put in by the Socialist Government in Chile that proved to be a massive success in putting more Democratic power into the Economy: https://steemit.com/steemstem/@fmlpanda/project-cybersyn-the-past-s-attempt-of-a-future-economic-dream
-- Deliberative Democracy --
Deliberative Democracy takes aspects of Direct Democracy, Diplomacy and Representative Democracy into account and smashes them all together. Deliberative Democracy allows a Representative government to bring in a completely randomised group of people from all backgrounds in the general public and allows them to change bills/laws to fit the concerns of the public. This allows for a random group who statistically should be a good scaled match for the general populace in gender ratio, sexuality, religion, age, race, class, political views and so on, allowing for the bills to be changed to fit the general publics views.
-- One party/Big Tent Democracy --
One party Democracy sounds like a oxymoron and doesn't sound like an actual democracy since most of us view democracies as having separate parties with different views. But in places like China, they do still have something that mirrors a democracy. The idea is that you have one big party that spans everything from the Far-left to the Far-right, and you vote people in who don't have to follow a manifesto but their own principles that they propose to their electorate, its not seen as a "liberal Democracy" but its not tyrannical either, one of the guiding ideas is that its much easier to rat out the standing members who are corrupt because there is no longer a Bureaucracy in the way of figuring that out, large donations to those members from corporations will still be held with the Electoral Registrar and kept public knowledge.
-- Direct Democracy --
Link to my past post on this subject, plus me taking a bullet and saying something rather important: https://steemit.com/politics/@fmlpanda/representative-democracy-more-like-a-democratic-dictatorship-as-well-as-an-important-message-that-needs-to-be-heard
What kind of Democracy we end up with depends on the Cultural Significance that each model holds to a specific region of the world, as well as the history of the Country implementing it. But for what it is worth, each model although some i don't agree with in principle do at least in theory have some good points to it. My own leanings are in favour of Direct Democracy, Deliberative or E-Democracy, or some melding of the 3, so i'd rather be upfront about my own biases and lack of knowledge around other kinds of Democracies.
