Edemocracy (properly structured) should replace Representative Democracy everywhere.

Thank you very much to Con for such a wonderful argument. But all those points have been sorted out in favor of Edemocracy that I can explain now. 1. It is the opposite of giving absolute power to anybody. President & Parliaments will be our messengers doing what we vote for. Only the representative systems are the ones where we leave decision making in the hands of Politicians for 4 years after a dramatic polling day. The founding fathers were afraid of the present representative system (not of direct democracy).In the present system we give the mandate for 4 years to do whatever they think appropriate in their opinion. This is where the problems arise, when there is War like situation, recession like situation, citizens don't have any say except to believe President/Legislators' thinking and ideologies. Who is doing exception handling here -President and legislators- according to their political ideologies! What we see everyday is that out of the square easy solutions are not even given a thought as they are small to the big ego political system. In fact, the Hitler type of President is possible in this very Representative System and not on the Edemocracy model ,where each and every issue will be voted in or out without political philosophies. Switzerland already practices direct democracy (half-direct democracy), in which any citizen may challenge any law at any time. Approximately four times a year, voting occurs over various issues; these include both Referendums, where policies are directly voted on by people, and elections, where the populace votes for officials. Federal, cantonal and municipal issues are polled simultaneously. 2. Common man who is in the thick of every day problems knows the answers to the problems better than legislators. There will be peers for groups who would put things in easy to understand pattern for citizens belong to their peer group so it will be smoother. One of the very issues on which edemocracy comes into the picture is the sheer size of the population and the various issues for them and all the limitations of about 700 people to understand and solve those issues. These 700 odd people are currently bulldozing the issues into two philosophical extremes to temporarily put a compromising stance in the form of a bill. Example the Health Care Issues.: According to a 2008 Commonwealth Fund report, US ranks last in the quality of health care among developed countries. The WHO, in 2000, ranked the US Health Care System as 37th in overall performance and 72nd by overall level of health (among 191 nations ).Still it is costliest system in developing world. Because we are trying to compromise but never tried to use synthesis as method of seeking long-term, mutually-beneficial solutions to problems, this goes on.3. In the direct democrayof Switzerland people dont collide as Con is fearing. In edemocracy situation, it will be quite faster to initiate a bill by citizens and pass it. We address the problem Con raised by preset tenets and principles and guidelines. It will never be a free for all with un-comprising set of rules which includes individual freedom, property and rights . Any affected person will raise the issue immediately online as opposition. Any proponents of bill tend to undstand the problems of affected person instantly. Proponents would react better than a Political representative who tries to compromise to majority opinion for the sake of Election. 4. The Technology has been tested and all the loopholes have been spotted . It can deliver now. Web-based e-voting system has been used (real, binding votes) since January 2003 in Swiss, as well as in many local governments. Problem areas have been identified including identity, security confidentiality, etc. We are not saying one particular system is right or not. Totally we are capable of taking care of all tech aspects of providing edemocracy, now. In fact the current electronic voting machine and other half-initiatives are worst in all aspects than the full edemocracy we talk about. When a person has a mobile phone it is enough or the system will provide him access, no worries. By Sandy example Con thinks about Once in a 4 year election scenario. In Sandy situation where the "issues vote" will wait for that region to come out of the Hurricane, or even if it is already voted, those people can initiate another poll just to alter a point in the bill immediately online in the next time frame whenever they are able to access internet. As long as people want to cast votes in traditional manner that will continue for 4 year elections. 5. We want to keep it for many years. But the role will undergo drastic change.Here Parliamentarians express their opinion as an advice, before they vote they ask their constituency voters ; if enough constituency voters made a decision then it is binding on the Parliamentarian.This is not an idea any more.This is where we are moving forward.http://goo.gl...http://goo.gl...