Log in

No account? Create an account
entries friends calendar profile Previous Previous Next Next
IT Enablement of Government - Ed's journal
IT Enablement of Government
There's a question that's been bouncing around in my head recently. How could information technology revolutionise the process of government?

I mean, if you think about it, the reason we have representatives in Parliament, is because of the intrinsic difficulties involved in letting everyone in the country express their opinion - both because of the geographic limitations, and because of time constraints - keeping up with all the debates in the commons is time consuming.

But ... that's not actually necessary any more, really is it? I mean, how many votes did we have in the recent X-factor, big brother, or strictly come dancing?

Right now, we've got a large proportion of our population telecommunication capable, with more than a few able to 'do' the internet, in some form or other.

So anyway. Hypothetically speaking, if we were to:
1/ Ensure that everyone _did_ have internet capability.
2/ Allow some kind of 'transferrable vote' based democracy, such that you can
either: Vote on an issue yourself or transfer your vote to someone else, on the basis that they will represent your interest.

Could a system of government based around this principle ... even be functional? And would it be better or worse than the current system?
3 comments or Leave a comment
jorune From: jorune Date: April 22nd, 2009 07:59 pm (UTC) (Link)
It might be able to work but would you want to end up with single issue voter blocs dominating proceedings? Let's leave the sheeple where they belong, on digg and reddit and the BBC's Have your say.
sobrique From: sobrique Date: April 22nd, 2009 08:33 pm (UTC) (Link)
But surely that's the point of democracy? Not that the voters are well informed, but that they have the right to influcence the process if the choose - It is horribly inefficient, but fundamentally ... well, thatt's the point - to be inefficent enought that corruption is hard, and power blocs are diminished.
jorune From: jorune Date: April 23rd, 2009 03:25 pm (UTC) (Link)
I think the point of govt is that it evolves to fit the society it is linked to. So Britons and Germans prefer a pragmatic approach as the results of their utopian models, The English Republic and the Third Reich, did not work out so well. The Nordic region prefers Social Democracy not just because of a desire for social justice but also because they are hidden veins of selfishness and envy. If everyone is more or less equal then you know those bastards across the street aren't doing better than you. They remember their collective past of mass emigration and poverty. England alone has twice as many people as the entire Nordic region.

If you want to live in a country which has direct referendum then you'll be dealing with places like California with its controversial Prop 13 and Prop 8 or Switzerland where the populace campaign for and pass tax increases.

Introducing electoral changes into a society where they do not fit historical patterns is an exercise in hope. American academics tried to introduce their model into Japan in 1945 and Russia post communism. Each time the country morphed and changed the model to fit their cultural expressions. While democracy still exists in both countries they have been many years of one party rule.
3 comments or Leave a comment