There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

multifariace ,

End FPTP. House of representatives actually representing the people instead of state or party. Senate still representing states but not parties.

Modern_medicine_isnt OP ,

IMO anything with a direct vote of the people will end up as spending wars between special interests with the funds to advertise.

Aatube , (edited )

Anarchy’s free association. We simply have them split and control their own part of land unless there’s agreements to use certain parts of common land. Would work for everything except global warming.

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Soviet Democracy. Workers elect delegates from among themselves, who can then be subject to instant recall elections at any time. Remove the “career politician” aspects from government.

https://lemmy.ml/pictrs/image/1cde6b45-3192-4b44-a52b-c7a3ec280f48.png

Aatube , (edited )

Could work if you remove the democratic centralism part, which is an effect of one of the main reasons the USSR was undemocratic most of the time

Cowbee ,
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Almost every democratic structure practices Democratic Centralism, it just means the group is bound to the democratic results.

Aatube ,

Just like many things in the USSR, It was perhaps that way in principle, but nefariously twisted in practice, where it means that everyone must vote whatever the elite thinks, majority requirements be damned. Like the ancient parable of Yu the Great choosing a successor, a dictating elite are bound to self-perpetuate and stray away from the proletariat, even if that's what they were once.

Cowbee , (edited )
@Cowbee@lemmy.ml avatar

Nah, it was democratic, moreso than Capitalist countries. You can read This Soviet World if you want a look at it.

ryathal ,

A bit is specific, but you can probably adapt them.

  1. Bring back pork spending, it’s over all cheaper to spend 100 million on some garbage than beating people into submission to pass something.
  2. Increase number of representatives significantly, makes some things less efficient, but also massively reduces the power of lobbying, and increases the power of localized activism.
  3. Limit length of allowed legislation per vote. Smaller more focused bills are ultimately better than sweeping legislation that attempts to address everything. More votes also makes working together easier with lower stakes and more opportunities to collaborate.
Ziggurat ,

Randomly drawing citizen. Sure politics require some training, but it can be done on the job

Also, countries with proportional votes tend to force politicians to talk with each other more than countries with single representative per district.

Limiting elected official mandates to one or two. If you couldn’t do something in 10 years no reason to think you’ll do it latter

QuarterSwede ,
@QuarterSwede@lemmy.world avatar

Have you worked with people recently? A decent amount can’t learn anything and don’t take personal accountability. I guess that does sound like Congress.

AbouBenAdhem ,

Direct democracy—except instead of directly voting on legislation, voters vote on the desired effects of legislation and a metric for measuring if those effects are being achieved. The actual legislation is then written by specialists trained on effective policy implementation, who can adjust the legislation on the fly if it isn’t having the desired effect. Their mandate is limited by the associated metric—if they can’t meet the goals, they lose their mandate and the case goes back to voters for review.

Modern_medicine_isnt OP ,

Hm… I can’t see voters being able to understand metrics enough to choose what is in their best interest. Also, anything where everyone votes will be dominated by special interests that have the money to advertise.

xmunk ,

A parliament.

PeepinGoodArgs ,

There’s a few ways in practice.

  1. Court decisions are binding broadly. The conservative capture of the Supreme Court is political genius, honestly. They tend to have the final say regarding policy.
  2. Federal agency rules are also broadly binding. EPA rules that limit greenhouse gas emissions, for example, apply everywhere in the country.
  3. State legislatures are often less polarized, which facilitates a more productive legislature.
  4. State agencies, like a state environmental department, mirrors its federal counterpart but is more localized.
  5. Non-state organizations can get things done, though their interests are often limited and not necessarily in the interests of the broad public as state and federal institutions are.
  6. International institutions can ‘set the tone’. They may not have any power to actually do anything within a specific jurisdiction, but people within those jurisdictions can draw policy inspiration from international organizations and try for something locally binding.
HobbitFoot ,

The only alternative to an elected legislature (parliaments are different from congresses) is either direct democracy or one party rule.

P00ptart ,

Well my good-faith arguments would be direct democracy (i.e. everyone votes on every change) or ranked choice, but that has its own problems. However, you didn’t say it has to be serious. So I suggest a system that locks a chimpanzee on LSD into a room with signs (options) and blinking lights. Chimp starts rolling and points to the blinky light he likes (or hates) either way, your government is operating far more efficiently than hairless apes doing something that is apparently too much work, and most are just as ill-informed as acid-chimp. I honestly think acid chimp accidentally gives you a better (albeit random) set of values than capitalism/democracy ever has.

BearOfaTime ,

You, I like you.

over_clox ,

What’s the opposite of congress?

Progress

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •