CreateDebate


Debate Info

44
33
Yes! Democracy at its best. No! Elected leaders only.
Debate Score:77
Arguments:24
Total Votes:92
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes! Democracy at its best. (13)
 
 No! Elected leaders only. (11)

Debate Creator

xaeon(1095) pic



Would/could a political party based on a system similar to CreateDebate be successful?

Could majority rule realistically work?
Majority Rule (en.wikipedia.org)

Yes! Democracy at its best.

Side Score: 44
VS.

No! Elected leaders only.

Side Score: 33
6 points

I've been considering for a long time attempting to form a political party which uses an internet based voting/discussion system to decide policies.

What does everyone else think on the issue? Could it work? Woud majority rule be successful, or would we witness the tyranny of the majority?

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
KelsoH(26) Disputed
3 points

You could create a political party with this system. But that's it. Good luck ever standing a chance in any election. You do realize that only young 20-somethings use social media politically at the moment? You would not get a single vote from old people, who vote in mass droves.

I suggest you try implementing your approach to the parties that already exist in your electoral region. I think as a consultative guide, online democracy could work. But never as the ultimate policy decider of a party.

Also, all parties have a policy process similar to that of create debate. They have people offer up ideas, there is a period to speak in favour or against ideas, and then, democratically, party members vote on policy. It's basically the same format as create debate, only that it happens in real life and is filled with old people.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
2 points

The whole point of a political party in our system is to bring together those who support specific views/policies that are the most important to them.

A party with no agenda or base, whose membership is not limited in any way will just end up representing random views based on plurality and thus not really represent any of it's members.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
1 point

Good luck on your endeavor!

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
0 points

I like the idea, If you have success, give us a yell

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
5 points

I believe that "technology" such as CreateDebate could help a political party become successful. This website is a tool for people to pick apart issues and opinions. Political parties (and most large groups of people for that matter) would benefit from an improved way to communicate internally.

If political party used a Rules Committee to govern use of the tool, corruption could be mitigated. I think its a great idea. I actually think its something that Ron Paul folks would really love.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
4 points

I agree with using something like CreateDebate to aid a political party would help them become successful prior to their discussion would truly help them get down to business when it comes down to making any sort of decision.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
3 points

I hope that something like this could work. I don't think our elected officials do a good job of representing my best interests. The Congress was formed because in that time people were uninformed about the issues that effected them, so they had to have an elected official represent them. I think that a tool like CD would work well if you could get the participation (especially the older population....my mom can hardly even check her email).

I think this site can be used to make ordinary decisions as well. Something like, "Where should we go to dinner tonight" could be hashed out online instead of in tireless email threads.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
what(1) Disputed
1 point

I must say I think the people are even more uninformed about policies than ever before. Too much fake drama/ news that they don't bother themselves with real problems of the US/ world. Ignorance and uninformed voters are rampant.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
KelsoH(26) Disputed
3 points

This is the old the "grass is greener" argument. EVERY generation thinks that the decades preceding it was better, etc. It's the same stereotype that violence is increasing now more than ever before when in fact it's the opposite: Crime has fallen.

People never had access to internet and learning took a long time back then. Nowadays we have the internet which can provide instant information on nearly everything. How many people read encyclopedias leisurely as they did before Wikipedia existed? Not many.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
2 points

I am a bit confused by the titles that were chosen for the two choices. However as the debate went on a bit I figured out what was really being asked, or at least I think I have.

I think that a political party would benefit greatly from having this sort of tool, and actively utilizing it. It would be a great way of solidifying platforms and maintaining a unified front. Because even within a party there are fairly significant disagreements on how an issue should be solved or even to what extent a topic should be addressed by government. It'd give candidates a better feel for what the voters are looking for, rather than the other way around. After all elected officials are expected to serve the constituent's agenda, not their own.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
1 point

This can possibly work.

But in a society where every person has his own strong oppinion.

Has the guts to voice it. Has the ability to think sanely. And is independent from another persons oppinion.

The democracy thing is all about it. Too bad that the ancient greeks when they invented the whole democracy thing were dividing the society into Demos and Ohlos if i am not mistaken.

Those individuals that were close to the words in the beginning of my message were called Demos.

And the rest of people that were just a crowd that was easy to manipulate was called Ohlos.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.

No. A political party is a group of like minded voters and politicians. A party doesn't succeed unless it has unity in ideology and approach. Create debate is the opposite of that.

If you meant to ask if a electoral system like CreateDebate would work, than I'd say no. It would just be a big non secret ballot. Majority Rule, direct democracy, etc. is unconstitutional and unfair. A republic is the best system in my opinion.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
xaeon(1095) Disputed
3 points

No, I definately meant what I said. The traditional idea of a political party is exactly what you said, but does it always have to be that? Would people be more interested supporting a party that it knew would go ahead with policies that the majority wanted, rather than having to make up their mind about which party best matched their mindset (and, as with anyone, this means matching some of your ideas and opposing others - No one I know is completely like-minded to the party they support)?

I think it's interesting to address this issue (a political party based on majority rule) rather than an electoral system.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
5 points

Then you are bastardizing the concept of a political party. By definition, if a party is filled with people constantly disagreeing, rebutting, and campaigning against each other, then they are not a "party". People will already coalesce into parties based on what they already believe, and will be able to debate their views with people of opposing parties. If they are persuaded they can always switch.

Within parties too, opinions can differ (but always only slightly). These issues are sorted our by nominating party leaders, which can and usually is majority rule.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
4 points

I would be nice, but the public would find it hard to make decisions against them, eg.tax increases. Also, all the old pensioners that don't have computers would complain and bitch about how they don't have one and/or don't know how to use one

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
RevFred(351) Disputed
3 points

1. The people that don't understand taxes probably wouldn't bother with voting in that area.

2. The old pensioners are the people that got us into this mess in the first place.

3. There's access to computers everywhere and if something like this were to be implemented, even more places, "voting terminals" if you will, would pop up everywhere there wasn't one yet.

Side: Yes! Democracy at its best.
4 points

A group with this sort of system would be abused through the process of entryism. Every radical and other party member would hijack the group through mass voting systems like this, and pass the agendas they want, even when most of the party has disagreement with the issue.

Additionally, until everyone moves online, it's difficult to make a party that's truly representative since many older people do not browse the internet and thus miss their opportunity to contribute to the policy process.

If you could actually get all party members to use the site, and you could ensure those who voted were only members of the party you created. Then yes, a system like createdebate could work. But you will never get those conditions to be met. Good idea on paper though.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.
1 point

The sad reality is that the majority of people are stupid and don't know what is good for them.

Side: No! Elected leaders only.

I mean think about it for a second. How many people like me are out there? And you want to include them in the political process? Even if I'm one of a kind, imagine how much havoc I can wreck. ;)

Side: No! Elected leaders only.