Direct Democracy Vs. Representative Democracy

[omegaflare]

It has been generally agreed that a socialist state must have democracy to survive.... If the goal of world revolution is accomplished, then how would this be done in a direct democracy? Is it even feasible for a direct democratic socialist state to be created? (worldwide, that is) Would it be possible for a representative democratic proccess to be implemented in a socialist state? I was thinking along the lines of Marx in this little quote...


"The Commune was formed of the municipal councillors, chosen by
universal suffrage in the various wards of the town, responsible
and revocable at any time. The majority of its members were
naturally working men, or acknowledged representatives of the
working class.... The police, which until then had been the
instrument of the Government, was at once stripped of its
political attributes, and turned into the responsible, and at all
times revocable, agent of the Commune. So were the officials of
all other branches of the administration. From the members of the
Commune downwards, the public service had to be done at workmen's
wages. The privileges and the representation allowances of the
high dignitaries of state disappeared along with the high
dignitaries themselves.... Having once got rid of the standing
army and the police, the instruments of physical force of the old
government, the Commune proceeded at once to break the instrument
of spiritual suppression, the power of the priests.... The
judicial functionaries lost that sham independence... they were
thenceforward to be elective, responsible, and revocable."

Is this a reference to a representative democratic process in a soclialist state?

[KC]

It has been generally agreed that a socialist state must have democracy to survive.... If the goal of world revolution is accomplished, then how would this be done in a direct democracy? Is it even feasible for a direct democratic socialist state to be created? (worldwide, that is)

Why would there be a worldwide socialist state?


Would it be possible for a representative democratic proccess to be implemented in a socialist state?

No.

[Taboo Tongue]

Is this a reference to a representative democratic process in a soclialist state?
Yes he is, "The Commune was formed of the municipal councillors" I always boiled that down to "The commune had local represenatives."


Would it be possible for a representative democratic proccess to be implemented in a socialist state?
Yes the Commune, and the USSR I beleive. (And probably others I am unaware of)


Would it be possible for a representative democratic proccess to be implemented in a socialist state? I
That's a question I'm interested in too, I never really saw why there, couldn't be a society with only a few ellected officials needed. I would assume that the reason neither of us know would be due to the lack of Historical evidence (atleast after or during a Socialist society).
Now I'm not the most astute Marxists (that's why I come here, to learn), but hopefully that'll answer your questions.

[Hate Is Art]

I don't understand why there couldn't be a representatitive democracy under socialism?

[Le People]

Direct democracy is true democracy while representitive democracy creates apathy in participation and propells the bourgise to ruleing class.

[enigma2517]

Agreed.

Nor the party, nor its representatives can free you.

You, as the worker, must be in charge of your own emancipation.

[JKP]

Indeed. All power must be held by the workers. A representitive democracy just dilutes whatever power the workers have, and transfers it to an elite bureaucracy. The workers are capable of freeing themselves and must give them the chance.

[Hate Is Art]

Ok, how do you propose to have a direct democracy including all 6,000,000,000 or so people in the world?

Representitive democracys only cause apathy under capitilism, why would they under Communism?

In Communism all power will be held by the workers, workers will be elected to do different things. I think you have got your wires crossed.

[Le People]

Originally posted by Digital [email protected] 14 2005, 09:14 AM
Ok, how do you propose to have a direct democracy including all 6,000,000,000 or so people in the world?

Representitive democracys only cause apathy under capitilism, why would they under Communism?

In Communism all power will be held by the workers, workers will be elected to do different things. I think you have got your wires crossed.
I think a confederacy of sorts (not the american civil war kind) could organize and chunk down the system because of the flexable de centralism.

[enigma2517]

Mandated delegates, not representatives.

Federation, not centralization.

Free association, not democratic centrism.

Thats how. The actual struture would look somewhat similar to the way things are now, except power would go bottom up. Local communities would have the ultimate autonomy. These days, in the US at least, the federal government controls a vast majority of things, followed by the state, and of course, local power is pretty miniscule.

The difference isn't in the style of organization, its mostly in the way that power flows.

[TC]

The fact is that in any state, you need people to run the state for the benefit of the ruling class, whether thats the proletariat or the capitalists or the aristocrats...they can't run the state themselves because they're busy running the economy. If all farmers spent all day in town hall debates over day to day issues they'd all starve.

"direct democracy" so called is utopian, unrealistic, totally impractical and impossible to implement...and in situations where there is direct democracy such as student anarchist meetings or whatever, tend to be some of the least democratic ways to conduct buisness because everyone ends up being led by the strongest personality, agreeing out of a desire to simply move on. (and even then, its only possible because no one has work to do and theres nothing especially important being decided, its not like they have assets or finances to regulate).

And theres no reason why there can't be electorial checks at every level such as in the Cuban system where virtually all legislation and appointments require popular referendums and consent from regional and local representative bodies.

[Le People]

Here's my vision. Every community is a kind of city state. In the city state, their is a weekly mass meeting where you can say your peace and if the masses vote on it can become reality. At the meetings, a council is elected that views how things are working for a week, and if something goes wrong, an emergency meeting is called. To enforce laws, a militia council is elected, then memebers of the community can sign up to man the militias. Now, when someone is caught breaking the law, the evidence is presented at the meetings and the verdict is made by the masses and the convict is sentenced accordingly as the law prescribes. All positions have a weekly election and every one is eldigble.