It's a typical prisoner's dilemma:
A lot of people think none of the 2 parties are good, but dislike one better then the other. So instead of voting for a smaller party that they like, they vote for the one bigger they mistrust less in fear of the other winning.
They know it would be more beneficial to vote someone else, but they don't dare in fear for the other camp not doing the same.
Let me get this straight:
- You think it's not a big deal if a record company scam millions per year in shady, extortion like deals
- You think it's ok to abuse the copyright system
- You think record companies do a huge amount of good (to who?), and deserve all the help they can get to stay afloat
- You think we actually need record companies (if they can't persist, then no, the marked do not need them.)
- You think music piracy is their main plight
Yeah, true democracy is more resistant to corruption (it's hard to bribe 200M people), but more suspectible to demagogy.
I don't say it would be possible to convert to this kind of crowd government in years.
Unfortunately, the current system favors dumb, controllable citizenry, while democracy would require intelligent people.
But the internet available to a lot of people, and gaining recognition as a valid information source, so maybe in the future.
In response to AC above:
Don't forget that with the internet, we have a vast information infrastructure. With proper moderation, classification and scoring of competence (seriously, numeric skill scores/reward badges for people who prove their competence on a given field, given by their peers, just like the "insightful" and "funny" here on TD) it could be hammered into a working system.
Or not. :]
It just occured to me that it could be tested in a virtual environment, like one of the MMORPG-s. No graphics needed, but everybody who joins gain citizenship to a fictional country, assigned/taken up a position, and respond to generated events, like political situations, disasters, lawmaking etc.
because you're implying blind people shouldn't expect to have independence
Oooookay, here's the plan:
1. read silverscarcat's comment again.
2. read my comment again.
Because if you read it and understood it, you wouldn't wrote something THAT stupid.
Here's some hint: "No one implied that "It's good as is, because others can help them out""
In other words: it's not ok, to have this bug, not ok, to expect blinds to have help around them all the time. He said they should get help to report this bug to the govt, so it can be fixed. I can't explain more simple to you.