Globally, Broad Support for Representative and Direct Democracy

[hollodero]

(10-18-2017, 04:15 PM)JustWinBaby Wrote: But it's true, and it's a founding principle that mob/herd mentality won't trample minority rights.  It is very strongly based on population, but offers some balance and protection for the minority.  The Senate is there to check the populous rule of the House, and offer some protection/preservation of the independence of states.

This isn't a "right" or "wrong" debate, this is a federalist vs. anti-federalist argument that the founding fathers themselves struggled with.  I would suggest the country is too big and too diverse to continue giving more power to the Feds.

But it isn't a federalist vs. anti-federalist debate. To see it as such, you would have to assume that liberals would want to dissolve states rights, which micht very well be true, but that is not the initial argument. Nor is it democratic to advocate a counter-reaction to that in the sense that you argue those people's vote should be capped in its relevance by making them slightly less decisive. Thats no offense, it's just what you do, you advocate that because you do not agree with the alleged ideas coming out of this "echo chamber".

One could very well argue if you see that objectively as well. I do not know about the US too much, so I can be easily refuted. In my country, the diverse places are the cities. The echo chambers, the life-long (conservative or more extreme right) voters no matter what, the regions where talking points get handed out and shared uncritically, is the countryside. I would never argue their votes should count less because they only listen to certain outlets and certain political figures. You. on the other hand, would. And that is not the kind of democracy I have in mind, the kind that has safeguards put in so your alleged minority opinion is protected against the opinions of the majority.

In the end, you devaluate an alleged majority's opinion just because you disagree with said opinion. Which leads to you not granting every american citizen the same right. You would argue because someone lives in a place you consider to be a BS echo chamber, his voice should be devalued a little compared to yours. That it's only a little doesn't make better what I consider a flawed understanding of the democratic principle. Your own words lead to that, not so much my interpretation.