A relationship would not be termed as exactly healthy where there is hundred percent agreement involved in each and every issue. Humans are designed to be disagreeable and there can be no such relationship where perfect harmony exists but our relationship with our respective governments is an exception to the rule. Once a government is elected we have to go along with their decisions for four or five years whether we like it or not.
Politicians promise us heaven and earth in their election campaigns but once they come in power they are allowed to do whatever they decide irrespective of the public opinion. Popular leaders can become unpopular very quickly in today’s fast paced world and the present system of ‘representative democracy’ does not allows us to disagree till the leaders’ term expire. So I keep asking myself, why we have to go along with our government’s decisions on all the issues for four or five years when popular public opinion does not support them.
The answer lies in a term called ‘direct democracy’. Direct democracy is a system of government in which the actual governing is carried out by the people governed, as contrast to representative democracy where the power to do so is granted by them.
Although the idea of direct democracy was visualized long ago but we have yet to see it implemented and the only way forward is to have ‘online democracy’. Can’t we have a system whereby governments hold instant referendums on major issues facing a country and form a decision based on public feedback? And the answer to that is ‘No’.
In 2001, Internet Policy Institute carried out a major review of the options for Internet voting. The study concluded that “remote Internet voting systems pose significant risk to the integrity of the voting process and should not be fielded for use in public elections until substantial technical and social science issues are addressed.”
Technical issues have especially to do with security. Another worry relates to fairness, and the possibility of restricting voting to those with computer skills and Internet access. The study concluded that the concept of electronic and online voting still makes sense in principle, but as long as practical problems of this scope remain, it may truly be “too far ahead of its time.”
For now, we can only wait and hope!
Politicians promise us heaven and earth in their election campaigns but once they come in power they are allowed to do whatever they decide irrespective of the public opinion. Popular leaders can become unpopular very quickly in today’s fast paced world and the present system of ‘representative democracy’ does not allows us to disagree till the leaders’ term expire. So I keep asking myself, why we have to go along with our government’s decisions on all the issues for four or five years when popular public opinion does not support them.
The answer lies in a term called ‘direct democracy’. Direct democracy is a system of government in which the actual governing is carried out by the people governed, as contrast to representative democracy where the power to do so is granted by them.
Although the idea of direct democracy was visualized long ago but we have yet to see it implemented and the only way forward is to have ‘online democracy’. Can’t we have a system whereby governments hold instant referendums on major issues facing a country and form a decision based on public feedback? And the answer to that is ‘No’.
In 2001, Internet Policy Institute carried out a major review of the options for Internet voting. The study concluded that “remote Internet voting systems pose significant risk to the integrity of the voting process and should not be fielded for use in public elections until substantial technical and social science issues are addressed.”
Technical issues have especially to do with security. Another worry relates to fairness, and the possibility of restricting voting to those with computer skills and Internet access. The study concluded that the concept of electronic and online voting still makes sense in principle, but as long as practical problems of this scope remain, it may truly be “too far ahead of its time.”
For now, we can only wait and hope!
No comments:
Post a Comment