Talk:Varieties of democracy

message: The text in the direct democracy section here was identical to subsection text in the main page on direct democracy before recent edits.  Also it was mainly pros/cons information which I think should be reserved for the more in depth analysis on it's main page.  So I copied the initial definition portion of direct democracy to democracy(varieties) and put a link to direct democracy with explicite mention of pros/cons and history.
I wouldn't know how to do this but could the text on the topic of direct democracy on the page democracy(varieties) be set to be the first section of direct democracy page.  Then we would not have to update the text on democracy(varieties) whenever direct democracy changes.  Otherwise the only sensible thing would be to make democracy(varieties) into a link page but then do we have pages for each of these varieties?  Just an idea :) Barnaby dawson 09:00, 5 Jul 2004 (UTC)

message: I came here looking for a comparison of Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and (perhaps) Jacksonian democracy.  I found nothing, although it seems it should be on this page or linked on this page.  I don't know enough about the topic myself to add anything, but maybe someone else does.  As such, I bring it up in the discussion area.  Scott Armstrong
:66.167.252.194 18:19, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Hamiltonian, Jeffersonian, and (perhaps) Jacksonian democracy 

message: 66.167.252.194 18:19, 3 Dec 2004 (UTC)
thread_title:  Constitution democracy 

message: Justification is requested for the following actions: The True Democracy page was deleted.  The True Democracy section in the Democracy:Varieties was deleted.  References to True Democracy on the Democracy page were deleted.
It is best to discuss objections on the discussion page before deleting entire sections.
There are many examples of true democracy practiced under various names, but the purest form of practicing democracy should not be excluded from on article on the same because it lacks universal practice or nomenclature.  Objections to the rule of the full demos (people) are endorsements of faction rule and mob rule, where the politically active rule.  Justification is requested for any opposition to the introduction of the concept of the rule of the people in any article on democracy.
:I re-removed the text.  I will await your references.  Obviously, we cannot include this material until we can see these references (and they better be good). — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work</span> 04:51, 13 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: I am re-deleting the material.  Without references, the material is suspect.  Please feel free to point us to some reference material. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 20:06, 18 November 2005 (UTC)

text: If you have "already given several references", then please point them out so that I and other editors can review them.  Re: "First talk, then delete", deleting content that's not substantiated either in the article or the talk is the norm.  Besides, we're not talking about much content anyway; it's not like anyone's life's work was ripped out.  It was also, IMHO, inconsequential to the article (esp. w/o references). Returning the material to the article can only be possible once we see some references. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 09:06, 21 November 2005 (UTC)

text: By the way, when I say references, I mean books, scholarly articles or other works that convincingly spell out this "true democracy" concept as the material covered it.  Obviously, we cannot go on "contributors' word" on topics like this. — Stevie is the man! Talk | Work 09:09, 21 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  True Democracy 

message: Nikodemos is deleting the entire Pure Democracy section. It's well established that this is a real concept. There are sources and all of people using the term. RJII 04:55, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It never existed in practice, and never had any supporters. The concept is a straw man. -- Nikodemos 06:07, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It existed in ancient Athens. There were no Constitutional protections for individual rights. Plato argued against it. More recently, the Framers of the US Constitution argued against it. "Pure democracy" has been discussed for thousands of years. RJII 06:10, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It did not exist in Athens. Plato argued against all the different kinds of democracy, since he favoured elite rule. The framers of the US Constitution used "pure democracy" as a straw man, as I noted above. If a theory has no supporters, it is not the least bit notable. -- Nikodemos 06:19, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: "In ancient Greece it was literally true that citizens (free-born males over the age of 30, which was about a quarter of the resident population in 5th-century Athens) ruled: they were appointed to public offices by lot, public policy was made in meetings of the assembly which all citizens were expected to attend, and elected officials were subject to vigorous popular scrutiny. There was no separation of powers and no constraints on popular sovereignty. This version of democracy was most famously propounded in the 18th century by the French philosopher Jean Jacques Rousseau, although he defended what he called republican rather than democratic government. The critics of direct democracy in the ancient world, including Socrates, Plato and Aristotle, had condemned pure democracy as dangerous and advocated a mixed constitution, combining elements of monarchy, aristocracy and democracy."  RJII 06:21, 29 March 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Nikodemos deleting Pure Democracy section

message: Democracy is divided into Direct and Indirect.
Indirect is divided into Representative and Delegative.
But later Direct government is contrasted with Representative, thus leaving out a contrast with Delegative government.
If, however, Indirect and Representative are equivalent, then we need a distinction between Delegative and Non-Delegative Representational Democracy.
What will it be?  
Skovoroda 14:35, 3 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Possible Inconsistency

message: I find the following classification to be the best I can think of:
Democracy
:Direct
:Indirect
::Representational
::Non-Representational
If anyone has objections or a better scheme, speak up.Skovoroda 22:11, 4 June 2006 (UTC)
thread_title: Proposed Classification

message: ===Alternative models of democracy===
Some believe that the distinction between direct and representative, or between broadly franchised majority rule, and more limited supervision of police and military primarily engaged in defending property rights, are not as important as the actual process by which decision making occurs.  Some further consider the adversarial process implied by legalist mechanisms (e.g., Supreme Court challenges, election campaigns themselves, political party structures) to often obscure the larger opportunities the public may have, or the long-term dangers they may face, which are not amenable to the kind of quick-retort interplay that characterizes both direct and representative means of governing.  Some of the models that are proposed to reform it include:
*Anticipatory democracy which relies on some degree of disciplined and usually market-informed anticipation of the future, to guide major decisions.
*Bioregional democracy (or the "Bioregional State") is a set of electoral reforms designed to force the political process in a democracy to better represent concerns about the economy, the body and environmental concerns (e.g., water quality), toward developmental paths that are locally prioritized and tailored to different areas for their own specific interests of sustainability and durability. This movement is variously called bioregional democracy, watershed cooperation, bioregional representation or one of other similar names—all of which denote democratic control of a natural commons and local jurisdictional dominance in any economic developmental path decisions.
*Deliberative democracy which focuses on hearing out every policy alternative, from every direction, and providing time to research them all.
*Demarchy which has people randomly selected from the citizenry to either act as representatives, or to make decisions in specific areas of governance (defense, environment, etc.). One of the results of this would be the cessation of political parties and elections.
*Grassroots democracy emphasizing trust in small decentralized units at the municipal government level, possibly using urban secession to establish the formal legal authority to make decisions made at this local level binding.
*Participatory democracy which involves consensus decision making and offers greater political representation, e.g., wider control of proxies others trust them with, to those who get directly involved and actually participate.
There are also debates about street democracy and electoral reform which emphasize the more local and situated means by which the public comes to know the issues, and directly encounter the consequences of making major decisions.  Some of these debates overlap with those about truth, anarchism, and the role of tolerances versus preferences in making major public decisions.
One may argue that the free market is also a form of democracy in that buying a product is a vote for the continued production of that product. This is also known as dollar voting. (Naturally, the wealthy have more voting power.
===World democracy===
World democracy simultaneously comprises two approaches, both mutually reinforcing: 
*Extending democracy to all countries.
*Introducing democracy in international organizations, via bypassing the screen of nation-states, particularly attempting reforms in the United Nations (see world presidentialism, democratic globalization and world government).
There has been a great deal of research about global trends of democracy. For example, over the last century, the percent of world population living in democracy has increased from 12% in 1900 to 63% in 2000. The majority of increase in democracy has been in developed countries, but about half of less developed countries are now democracies as well. Skeptics question these statistics (as well as the validity of democracy in various countries; democracy may be regarded as window-dressing over plutocracy, oligarchy, dictatorship or other forms of rule by the few).
===Comments on removal===
Above are the twp sections which have been filled with fact tags for over a year.  Please to not return any of this information to the article without a citation.--BirgitteSB 17:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed material contested for over a year 

message: Above are the twp sections which have been filled with fact tags for over a year.  Please to not return any of this information to the article without a citation.--BirgitteSB 17:29, 3 June 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Comments on removal