• halvar@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    That’s not democracy then, if I understand what you’re saying

    • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      It is if everyone gets selected from time to time. Selected citizens only participate to one issue at a time, they are not here to stay. It is the best and only non-digital direct-democracy system

      • Pinklink@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        That’s not representation of the people. That’s representation of one individual (or one small group of individuals) in each instance. May be different individuals, but one instance might be dealing with an act of war, the other might be local infrastructure.

        • Mubelotix@jlai.lu
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          The size of the group required for good representation can be calculated, and it’s not a lot

          • Pinklink@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            10 months ago

            There are 331.9 million people in the US. How many people need to be randomly selected for each issue? Okay I did look this up, approx 385 would do, with 5% margin of error. Which actually seems like a lot. Bump that to 97% confidence and it jumps to 1309. Idk seems like a lot of people to randomly select for each issue or even for each short term whatever we deem that to be. Plus then they need to vote, are we just looking for a standard majority?