Home

Blog

Civil Liberty
Coalitions
Constitution
Courts and Judicial System
Electoral Reform
Election Promises
Engaging the Citizen
Europe
Experts
Government
Legislation
Lobbies and Special Interests
Media
Narrow Election Results
Parliament
Party Funding
Petition
Political Parties
Politicians
Politician's Pay
Recall and Term Limit
Referendum
Separation of Powers
Swiss Model
Third Party
Tax and Public Spending
Trust in Government


 

Petitions

A politician once argued against the introduction of direct democracy by quoting an adviser to Charlemagne who supposedly told his King 1200 years ago that 'the clamour of the mob is often close to insanity'. That may well be so but we could also point out any number of politicians whose actions, and even more so whose opinions, would be called insane by a wide majority of the electorate.  We also have serious doubts as to whether Charlemagne would make a suitable leader in today's political landscape. Maybe some politicians would love to decide policies in the same way that Charlemagne could do - without having to consider the wishes of his people (who were still subjects in the true sense of the word).

In a similar vein the argument that supporters of a petition against rearmament in the 1930s were misguided cannot be used against the use of direct forms of government either as it does not prove that policies - or the outcome of policies - would necessarily have been different in the absence of the petition.

Calls for the reintroduction of the death penalty also do not stand as arguments against direct democracy are also often quoted as indications of the danger of direct democracy. But who is to decide that the majority is wrong if a call for the death penalty would be carried in a referendum?

Nor can we accept the argument that plebiscitory democracy 'will take us away from rational decisions'. In our opinion, a rational discussion of any policy is only possible if the public at large and all points of view can be aired and all voters have the final say on the issue - not only politicians that are beholden to parties, the party whip or lobbies that operate behind closed doors and have privileged access to the media and the decision makers.

More on Petitions

 

Why you should support
Dirdem:

► Are you angry when people want to control your life?

► Are you angry when people want to live off the fruit of your work?

► Are you angry when people want to tell you what to think?

►If your answer is YES to any or all of the above questions then you should support our Movement.

DIRDEM
is more than a traditional Political Party. We do not see this Cause as a career choice - or stepping stone leading to a lucrative career in the private sector.

DIRDEM
is not a Think Tank that publishes lengthy reports that are only read by a few insiders and later disappear in some library of filing cabinet.

DIRDEM
is not a Lobby or Special Interest Group that tries to gain advantage at the expense of other groups of society.

DIRDEM
is not a Religion or Ideology and does not try to make people believe in something except in the belief that no one should be allowed to rule our lives.
 

Decisions you would be able to influence:

By giving the reader examples of recent policy decisions we highlight the dramatic impact the introduction of Direct Democracy would have on the political life of all countries.

All the following decisions where taken without the participation of the affected citizens. Some - if not most - were highly controversial and have a negative effect for at least some major parts of the country's population.

The present system of government not only leaves the citizens powerless in the face of a never-ending tide of legislation, it also inevitably leads to inefficient use of taxpayer's money and a steady erosion of civil liberties.

See what decisions the citizens could influence directly in a proper democratic system