I myself have been going through some changes that have kept me even more distant from my blog than you’ve been from yours in the past month or so, and I’ll hopefully post on it in some way or another soon. In the meantime, congrats on the culmination of much hard work – I hope your product is very successful! And like I said, I’ll be here to read when (if) you do write again. :)

At least the people would be involved, and politicians make at least as many boneheaded and hateful decisions as the commons would.

For better or worse, I smell change is in the air! Something must change, as over 50% people chosing not to vote at all is alarming.

http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nichtw%C3%A4hler <- even if you don't speak German you can see the numbers. 40-50% abstention is the norm!

I think the world desperately needs a new e-democratic model. The problem with the old model is that lobbyists often work on eroding laws that are rather boring. The law protecting commodities markets against speculators – who cared about that until Goldmans and others got exemptions and food prices started skyrocketing?

Perhaps with the internet we don’t need representatives at all. Primary legislation can be passed by massive popular e-vote. That would mean a few rocky years as people vote in poorly thought-out stuff but people would learn to be sophisticated. At least that way if someone wants to bribe the people who pass the laws they have to try to bribe all of us (and someone will no doubt expose their ulterior motive).

But, that will simply never happen. Who in their right mind would propose/vote in such a law? Given that those who are in a position to do such a thing are the people getting these contributions?

And, no, the solution isn’t to “just run yourself” or whatever else – The only way to have a chance to grow as a viable candidate is to do so with the backing of a major party… and with very major fiscal support. Where do you get that? By selling out to corporate interests.

You’re right, though – to what is the question? Unfortunately, anything isn’t better, there’s a LOT of worse ways things could go. Worse, it’s pretty much impossible to get everyone together behind one idea – the very nature of the protests is pretty much “Anything but this!”

In any case, the #OccupyWallstreet thing is less about politicians and more about the increasingly absurd wealth gap, even if the people don’t strictly realize it. In a good economy with wages growing, no one really cares about politics. In a bad economy that nevertheless sees corporations raking in record profits, people suddenly finds the time make a /concernface.

Most of the pro-representative democracy points brought up in it’s defense are tired old sound bites with no real meaning anymore due to how utterly the system has been abused and broken.

I’ve been following the #OccupyWallstreet protests fairly closely, as well as the other similar ones springing up around the world. I’m still dubious, though, as to what can really happen. People – particularly the younger set – are indeed disillusioned with the status quo, but what can they really do?

Very rarely do protests actually effect meaningful change, particularly when – such as these – they don’t have a clear direction other than being a cry of discontent. The demands made are as varied as the people participating, and many are utterly unrealistic.

Add to that how those in power, both directly in government and somewhat more indirectly as large corporations/associations, have a vested interest in keeping the system as it stands now.

Things will have to get a lot worse before anything changes… Which is either depressing (nothing changes) or frightening (I’d hate to see things get much worse, as it’ll inevitably result in bloodshed).

The NYT article hints at some new system of government based more on tools of the Internet age….. but like any political system, it’s pure theory until someone comes up with the model, irons out the details, and proves that it works.

At this point anything is better than what we have now – representative democracy where the representatives ignore those who put them there.

If the agitation leads to a more direct democracy, that’s a step backwards in my mind. Mind you, I’m sick of leaders, too, but I’m convinced that we have two big problems; a populace that votes in the jerks, and lawmakers who are above the law.