- #36
Ryan_m_b
Staff Emeritus
Science Advisor
- 5,963
- 723
In my mind the biggest problem with democracy is the assumption that every voter is an informed individual. If we imagine a hypothetical country running a Direct Democracy we see that it should be fine at dealing with most issues if every member is well informed and makes a rational, unbiased decision when voting.
In reality however the majority of voters are uninformed on the majority of subjects (e.g. should a milkman living in the north have the right to vote on the proposal to build nuclear reactors in the south?) and therefore will base their vote either on what their peers tell them or what the media tells them.
I'm also not convinced by the idea that it's "what the majority want". I have a strange colleague who always advocates that if the majority of people want to kill and torture the minority then it is fine. Applied to a democratic country scenarios like that (though not as extreme) represent real problems, for example if 51% of the voters want everyone in the country to live quaint rural lifestyles (circa 1800s) should we just hold our hands up and say "hey, its what the majority want!" when the other 49% who want to live in cities and live modern lives are forced by the will of the former. Another way of posing this problem is if voters have different reasons for voting i.e. one votes for nuclear power because they understand the numbers involved and one votes against because as much as they understand the numbers they have a personal preference to live a medieval lifestyle.
In reality however the majority of voters are uninformed on the majority of subjects (e.g. should a milkman living in the north have the right to vote on the proposal to build nuclear reactors in the south?) and therefore will base their vote either on what their peers tell them or what the media tells them.
I'm also not convinced by the idea that it's "what the majority want". I have a strange colleague who always advocates that if the majority of people want to kill and torture the minority then it is fine. Applied to a democratic country scenarios like that (though not as extreme) represent real problems, for example if 51% of the voters want everyone in the country to live quaint rural lifestyles (circa 1800s) should we just hold our hands up and say "hey, its what the majority want!" when the other 49% who want to live in cities and live modern lives are forced by the will of the former. Another way of posing this problem is if voters have different reasons for voting i.e. one votes for nuclear power because they understand the numbers involved and one votes against because as much as they understand the numbers they have a personal preference to live a medieval lifestyle.