Maybe I'm just simplifying the purpose of representative democracy, but I always thought it arose out of necessity in some regard. Like back in the day it took days to get from NY to Philly. You couldn't send everyone there so you needed someone to represent people in the process (obviously not us #neverforget).

With the technology we have today, probably 90% of the interested citizens could be voting on every thing that congress and the senate debate. I'm probably giving too much with that 10% cause with the rise of mobile i think those with limited access are probably much fewer than it used to be. And naturally interested parties wouldn't be huge numbers for every issue. But if democratic participation was open I think it might encourage more civic duty across the board.

Shit imagine if you could actually put a bill on the docket, you'd need a threshold of supporters before it went for a vote. Open voting over a limited period. Political representatives would basically be moderators or educational resources to help citizens understand the issues/complexities/etc.

Obviously we aren't ready for that today because... well have you been to a .gov site lately. But if security was boosted to the tenth and the process was rolled out over like ten years... shouldn't that be a reasonable goal. Would you want that? What are the foreseeable problems (sans hackers because that's obviously going to happen)?

(Incidentally, there's a book Infomacracy by Malika Older (sp) coming out this month I can't wait to read, I don't think it's this per se but maybe it touches on it).

█▆▇▅▇█▇▆▄▁▃
Big PEMFin H & z's
"I ain't no entertainer, and ain't trying to be one. I am 1 thing, a musician." � Miles

"When the music stops he falls back in the abyss."