Direct democracy is a form of government where citizens participate in making laws and policy decisions. This type of government is common in other countries, but its practicality is often debated. This blog post will discuss the basics of direct democracy and how it works. We will also explore some of the pros and cons of this type of government.<\/p>\n\n\n\n
A direct democracy enables people to have a say on laws and policies in their locality. These citizens can form or influence bodies that make laws that govern their respective jurisdictions. They also “pass measures to raise money through taxes on income, property, and sales” [Source]<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct democracy, also referred to as ‘pure democracy, is a form of democracy “in which the electorate decide on policy initiatives without legislative representatives as proxies” [Source]<\/a>. This way is healthy for a nation as the electorate can air out its needs rather than having a mouthpiece that might misrepresent it. However, contemporary governments have complexities in governance issues, so direct democracy will be hard to implement on the practical side. <\/p>\n\n\n\n It is argued that a country can use both direct and representative democracy but might likely lean towards representative more than being direct [Source]<\/a>. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The difference between direct democracy and a democratic republic is that representatives are elected to make laws in the republic, while in direct democracy, the citizens make their laws. The republic supports the election of a few people to make laws on behalf of citizens, whilst direct democracy seeks citizen intervention in making laws [Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Wikipedia notes that in “direct democracy, the people decide on policies without any intermediary or representative, whereas in a representative democracy people vote for representatives who then enact policy initiatives”. These representatives are members of parliament tasked to formulate acceptable policies which enhance people’s livelihood [Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Participatory democracy entails a “model of democracy in which citizens have the power to decide directly on policy and politicians are responsible for implementing those policy decisions”, so direct democracy falls under participatory democracy. But not all participatory democracy can be described as direct democracy [Source]<\/a>. On this issue, Raven Blake gave explained his argument by giving the following two sentences [Source]<\/a>:<\/p>\n\n\n\n And argued that the first sentence is direct democracy where one tells the leadership directly, while the second one is participatory, whereby a person must go through a middleman to air out their input. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Wikipedia notes that the difference between direct and deliberative democracy is that deliberative democracy is a type of direct democracy [Source]<\/a>. This means all deliberative democracy is direct democracy, but all direct democracy is not deliberative democracy. Deliberative democracy requires citizens to reach a consensus through “discussion, debate and information”, while direct democracy encourages all citizens to take action [Source]<\/a>. Deliberative democracy focuses more on deliberation, and direct democracy can either involve deliberation or focus on other aspects of coming up with solutions. <\/p>\n\n\n\n The difference between direct democracy and indirect is direct democracy is “where citizens themselves vote for or against specific proposals or laws”, and indirect democracy points to citizens choosing their representatives “to actively participate in the administration of the government and act on their behalf” [Source]<\/a>. Direct democracy is usually used in countries with a small population, while indirect is used in large nations. In a direct democracy, the whole community form legislature, while in indirect democracy, only the elected representatives become part of the legislature. <\/p>\n\n\n\n According to various views, direct democracy is best suited in a small population where the whole community can become part of the legislature [Source]<\/a>. It is next to impossible to implement it in a large country with a huge population. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct democracy is said to work well in countries with a “smaller population” where the whole community can become part of the legislature. But this might be problematic because our modern nations have large populations, and those regarded as having small populations still hit millions of people. Direct democracy can work in a specific area, like having a town or city involved in policy-making rather than the whole country. <\/p>\n\n\n\n In the UK, direct democracy is seen through the holding of referendums which have been applauded for making up for the shortcomings of the UK’s representative democracy system\u00a0[Source]<\/a>. Referendums increased the number of citizens participating in elections, as highlighted by the Electoral Commission in 2016.\u00a0<\/p>\n\n\n\n An authoritarian form of government is “where the power is concentrated between the leaders or leaders of the country” [Source]<\/a>, and this definition makes a distinction between direct democracy, which involves citizen participation in making laws and policies, and an authoritarian government that gives all the power to leaders.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct democracy promotes citizen involvement in making laws and policies, hence it can be described as democratic rather than authoritarian, promoting the confinement of power to leaders. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct democracy calls for the active participation of citizens in making policies and crafting laws to be used in a country, and representative democracy is whereby the electorate elects representatives to become members of parliament and represent the aspirations of the electorate. Through referendums, direct democracy has managed to dissolve the shortcoming of representative democracy by calling for more people to be aware of policymaking and get into political matters. Due to this, direct democracy becomes a complementary tool for representative democracy. <\/p>\n\n\n\n Direct democracy is hard to fully implement and have it as the only measure in a government, but it still exists in small segments such as referendums or voting for\/against the implementation of certain laws and policies.<\/p>\n\n\n\n In Switzerland, direct democracy is utilised, and it allows all Swiss citizens who are over the age of 18 to vote on how the country is run [Source]<\/a>. The voting public is granted a veto on laws adopted by the elected legislature. <\/p>\n\n\n\n It is noted that “In both a republic and a democracy, citizens are empowered to participate in a representational political system. They elect people to represent and protect their interests in how the government functions” [Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The disadvantage of direct democracy is that it cannot be implemented in a large population nation and only works for small populations. Also, it is hard to use as a standalone entity in the government because not everyone is willing to participate in political matters. Countries that use direct democracy are forced to only use it in small sections such as referendums and avoid it in a large scope. The practical part of direct democracy requires intensive resources to mobilise a huge chunk of citizens to participate in making laws and policies, so it is expensive to implement.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Other disadvantages are that “issues that are up for discussion are for local impacts” rather than the greater scope, the threat of vote manipulation, spending a lot of time in informing voters on the subject before they make a decision, and this makes it time-consuming, requires high participation from all citizens, takes a lot of time to make decisions, the majority of voters might infringe the rights of minority groups, voters may protect their selfish interest instead of acting on behalf of the whole community and citizens might be asked to respond to questions of governance and performance of committees\u00a0[Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n The 3 types of direct democracy are participatory, deliberative and semi-direct democracy [Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\n Under direct democracy, the public decides on policies without any intermediary or representative, but they do need some political leaders, and no government is purely democratic. Leaders become leaders through election by the population, the media also plays a part, and wealthy individuals get other positions [Source]<\/a>.<\/p>\n\n\n\nDo you think Direct Democracy is a suitable form of government<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Can Democracy be both Direct and Representative<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Difference between Direct Democracy and Democratic Republic<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Difference between Direct Democracy and Parliamentary Democracy<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Difference between Direct Democracy and participatory Democracy<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Difference between Direct Democracy and Deliberative<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Difference between Direct Democracy and Indirect<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Can Direct Democracy work with a large population<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Can Direct Democracy work<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
How do we use Direct Democracy in the uk<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Is Direct Democracy an Authoritarian form of government<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Is Direct Democracy Democratic or Authoritarian<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Does direct democracy undermine representative democracy<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Does Direct Democracy still exist<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
How Direct Democracy works in Switzerland<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
What do a Republic and a Direct Democracy have in common<\/strong><\/h2>\n\n\n\n
What are the disadvantages of Direct Democracy<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
What are the 3 types of Direct Democracy<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Direct Democracy – How do leaders become leaders<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n
Direct Democracy – How does it work<\/strong>?<\/h2>\n\n\n\n