Jump to content
Science Forums

Recommended Posts

The following is merely an idea, and does not fully reflect my political or sociological opinions.

The idea: A constitutional democratic republic much akin to the US of A. However, rather than votes of the majority deciding the fate of the entirety, what if every candidate with a specified minimum voter turnout was given jurisdiction of that specific voter base, with a precisely proportionate geographic jurisdiction? The possible motive for such a system would be to provide citizens much more flexibility in their way of life, and additionally those who make bad political decisions would more or less be the only ones living with them. To account for deficit of military resources that could potentially stem from this, the Commander in Chief could be entirely separate from the aforementioned political figures; only able to make decision effecting the military. 

Has such a thing been tried in the past? I am not experienced in civics or sociology, and would like to have a discussion about the possible practicality or lack thereof in a system such as this. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • 2 weeks later...

How would that work? You'd still have some people living under the government of somebody they didn't vote for. Or do you mean to use the recent USelection as an example, have Biden in control of the states that got the majority of the votes and Crybaby in control of the ones he won spltting the country in two? The might end up being the conclussion of the second US civil war that's coming judging by the online chatter.

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, A-wal said:

How would that work? You'd still have some people living under the government of somebody they didn't vote for. 

If you mean in regards to the President aspect, again the president would be separated from politics and deal only exclusively with military affairs. I'm not sure if that's actually possible although (again, not an expert); it could be that the two are directly intertwined.

Link to post
Share on other sites

But in every region that is self-governed you'd still have lots of people who didn't vote for that person, anything up to half.

The US basically does that now with each state being somewhat self governed. The US is so big it's basically the equivalent of the EU.

So you're just talking about taking all the goverence away from Washington and letting each state be its own independant country?

That's what just over about 52% of people in my country were dumb enough to vote for and we'll be dealing with that mess for decades.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, A-wal said:

But in every region that is self-governed you'd still have lots of people who didn't vote for that person, anything up to half.

The US basically does that now with each state being somewhat self governed. The US is so big it's basically the equivalent of the EU.

So you're just talking about taking all the goverence away from Washington and letting each state be its own independant country?

That's what just over about 52% of people in my country were dumb enough to vote for and we'll be dealing with that mess for decades.

No, I mean a government/political figure (with an adequate minimum amount of votes) is granted jurisdiction over only those who voted for them. And likewise, only the people who voted in them have to live under their jurisdiction. That way if you vote for a bad candidate, you and others who did the same would be the only ones living with the decision.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...