Direct (Anti-) Democracy

Prof Max Stearns gives a seminar to the UC Economics Departmet asking the question: is direct democracy anti-democratic? His answer - yes - is surprising, and his method of analysis new and distinctive. After surveying the arguments for and against direct democracy's institutions (referenda and citizen initiated plebiscites ), Prof Stearns argues for a new approach. He develops a novel methodological standard for comparing alternative institutions (using of a social choice framework to see which one of Arrow's axioms in his famous impossibility theorem is violated) Prof Stearn compares the institutions of representative legislatures, those of judicial decision making , and the institutions of direct democracy . On this yardstick direct democracy is much closer to the courts - ie anti democratic - than it is to representative legislature.

Category:

Education

Tags:

• direct democracy
• public choice
• social choice
• law and economics
• democracy

[selfruleuk]

He is pushing propaganda to make direct democracy look like something weaker that it is. California does not have deliberative direct democracy - no where does! He has a title and good memory but this is not an intelligent argument and can be easily pulled apart by the People's Administration: PAparty.co.uk. To question if their is a negative side to exercising free will and self rule is to not recognise the nature of direct democracy and of human choice-making mechanisms.

[jinsugarbrown]

Prof Max Stearns, please come to Switzerland ( not sweden) to learn about direct democracy.

[commandersprocket]

Calling a California style proposition system (plebiscite system) Direct Democracy is at best poor naming and at worst duplicitous. Direct Democracy enables people to have a voice on an issue, a voice that allows subtlety , a proposition system allows extremely interested party with significant resources to move policy in a bizarre way, usually moving a hard decision on a wedge issue.