Representitive Democracy is Flawed

[AK]

I think representitive democracy is flawed. You can't expect your voice to be heard. The only voice that matters is the grey-haired suit who acts on his own opinion. When you elect a president/prime minister you choose someone to make their own decisions that aren't necessarily yours.

[Pierson's]

true, but why is this in learning?

to make a truely representative democracy, you would very much have to have a proportinal system or similar. also, recall needs to be a possibility, and before any desision is taken, the consitutents would need to be consulted.

either way though, direct democracy is better.

[ArrowLance]

You're just silly, free representation for everyone!

[Comrade Anarchist]

A The representative gov'ts that we have created are totalitarian democracies. You choose who to control your life. A rep. gov't is easily corruptible because someone with money only needs to pay a few congressmen or a president, instead of 300 million people to control the government.

[Black Sheep]

You can "enhance" representative democracy in order to limit its flaws and its tendency to corrupt those empowered to represent those who elected her.
Inevitably, in large - scale discussions, i.e. when provinces discuss the building of a highway, you cannot except a few thousand people to directly converse about it.

Someone will be given the task to voice what those who empowered him with that task.
Of course, unlike rep dem today, has to be accountable for his actions, with immediate and direct judgement and removal from his 'post' if he/she 's not up to the task.

Power corrupts, so you either remove it completely, or when it can't be avoided, you check it all the time.

[Q]

In this context, I'd like to point to the Democracy or oligarchy? (http://www.revleft.com/vb/democracy-oligarchyi-t119643/index.html) thread where the thesis is made that elections have nothing to do with democracy in the first place. I think that is much more the cause of the problem in our perceived lack of democracy, than the idea of having representatives is. I don't think you can't avoid having one form of representation or another, but what you can do is make the representation as representative as possible.

[GPDP]

I agree with Q and bulk sheep, and to that I'd like to add that what's being objected to in the OP is not representation per se, but the nature of representation in our current bourgeois-statist government.

The problem lies not in representation, but in the social, political, and economic context upon which our "representative" government lies upon, as well as the structure of our current system of representation.

I don't think I need to go over what's wrong with the context upon which present day representative democracy works here, so for the purposes of this discussion, let us limit ourselves to the nature of representation.

Ultimately, in dealing with representational structures, it comes down to the nature of representation. Do we want our representatives to be delegates, trustees, or something in between (politicos, as they are known in political science)? Do we want them to be 100% accountable to their representatives at all times and subject to immediate recall, or do we want them to exercise their own judgement in the context of enumerated terms? Do we want them subject to specific programs outlined by collective associations of people, or should they run under their own individual proposals upon which they plan to run for election and re-election?

As a socialist, I would argue the best and most democratic representational structure is that of delegation, strict accountability to representatives and specific programs and proposals, and the subjection of representatives to the collective will. I recognize direct democracy is, of course, always preferable, but there will always be a need for some manner of representation for purposes of dealing with other entities at higher levels, such as relations between communes, provinces, or even nations. As such, I believe in that context, the question should not be whether representation is desirable, but indeed what form is most desirable.

I'll write more on this later. Also, sorry if my post sounds repetitive. I wrote this in a hurry.