Talk:Democracy

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Tlevenda.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 19:16, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

No statement about Karantanian Democracy?? (as the birth of real Democracy?)

The old Karantanian Democracy was called Rota (in Latin: Institutio Sklavenika Lex) which included election of the prince and later dukes "in the name of people". All women and men have had free will to elect their leader. His descendants weren't necessary new rulers over the land.

Here is a short description of it. Karantanian democracy inspired Bodin and later American president Thomas Jefferson who wrote American Declaration of Independence.

http://www.hervardi.com/images/spomenik_ustolicevanje.gif http://www.globalpolitician.com/print.asp?id=698

Remove translation section

I believe that the "translation" section should be removed. The information it contains belongs to the Chinese wikipedia. There is a link to it [1] in the "languages" column. Agnerf (talk) 07:19, 11 October 2021 (UTC)

Done. Agnerf (talk) 10:22, 10 November 2021 (UTC)

Law

The democracy functions effectively dur to 2402:8100:309B:9785:1:0:B663:18DB (talk) 15:14, 24 December 2021 (UTC)

Democracy can't work with more than 50 people involved

"The original form of democracy was a direct democracy."

Since democracy can't work with more than 50 people involved, there is no such thing as a "representative" democracy. The USA calls itself a democratic republic...where 500,000 people choose the representative. It's just simple logic it can't work...and lo and behold, it doesn't

With less than 50 people involved, it's possible for all those people to know each other and to know who to trust and not to trust to make decisions for them. Any more and that becomes impossible.

And thus democracy descends into a very expensive, dysfunctional, inefficient "least ugly" contest. The word "was" in this description is revealing. And it can easily be shown that even "direct" democracy fails to recognize this obvious limit. Look at the size of the "halls" of democracy that house those representatives.

When you try to spread democracy around the world you are spreading mush.

"Encyclopedic content must be verifiable through citations to reliable sources.": so you people who think you are "reliable sources", get writing. I have yet to see a reference to the "obvious" presented here. Do reliable sources present the obvious? WithGLEE (talk) 12:39, 29 December 2021 (UTC)

A better distinction between the direct and representative democracy

The main article about democracy is split into direct and representative democracy. The main democracy article could specifcy that most of the time when people say democracy, they talk about representative democracy, and few people have experienced or demanded a direct democracy in their country. The article does not specifcy the contrast between the two democracy, and the fact that representative democracy is not the pure form of democracy, but the direcy democracy is. TudorTulok (talk) 14:20, 31 January 2022 (UTC)

Tis is covered sufficiently in the lead. Read the 2nd paragraph. Zaathras (talk) 14:17, 13 February 2022 (UTC)