Democracy

            There are two major types of democracy. One is direct and the other is indirect. There are some differences among these types of democracy. Direct democracy is involved with individual citizens participating in making decisions rather than other elected representatives. Indirect democracy is used with a supreme group or elected representative who makes the choices.

            Before we used democracy, the Greeks did. The Pellicles believe that all male citizens should take part in government regardless of wealth and social class. The Athenians chose to use direct democracy. Only males took part in government affairs. Important issues were decided several times each month. At least 6,000 members were needed to be presented before decisions were made.

            The U.S. and most other democratic counties use indirect democracy. Reasons why direct democracy is good are citizens are more involved with the day to day affairs in the government and decision making would be more conclusive. Direct democracy may also lead to some problems such as inaccurate or slow responses to a decision. Indirect may be good as well because citizens would not have to worry about a decision as much and quicker conclusions to the choices would happen. Some reasons why indirect democracy can cause problems are citizens not agreeing on a decision made by the representatives and citizens could have no part in them.

            All in all I think direct democracy would fit well with a small population and indirect democracy would fit well with a larger population. In small groups, it would be easier to make decisions together because there would be fewer debates than in a larger group. Larger populations would need a supreme group to make the decisions because it would be much quicker and easier. Both democratic ways should be used if their population or community agrees with it. If not, it may lead to corruption in the government.

Response

    I agree with Jordan about people making the wrong decisions. Decisions should probably be decided by representatives who actually know what they are doing. With our daily life, it may be hard to concentrate on making a decision. If a vote for getting rid of tax, would you vote yes? Would you risk corrupting the government? We all know that cigarettes may cause lung cancer and then death. If we remove them from the markets, our economy may not be as stable as it is now.

            Big companies who have much money would probably be more powerful than a standard middle class. Therefore with more power, these companies are able to buy more reps and the more reps the more votes they get. A way for these companies to have there way is to use there representatives and say that they can do this and that while helping these companies.

            If we were all perfect and new everything about running a country then obviously this would not be a problem. The reality is that not everyone is reliable on making the right decisions. This is why I disagree that direct democracy would be good and indirect democracy would be better in this case.

            I also agree about religion being a big influence in a direct democracy. The example Jordan gave about a vote for abortion was good. If your religion believes that taking away a life even if unborn, then most likely that person will vote no for abortion.

            Democracy is a good way to run a society but it is not perfect. There are some flaws to it such as not having a total control in a decision in an indirect democracy. Direct democracy is good too but that too has some flaws to it. Democracy, I think is one of the best ways to run a country.