1

First of all I'm explaining with I refer to with ideas, after all by voting a political party you are voting some ideas.

Most political parties have a certain set of ideas that they may apply or not, but I'm sure very very few people are 100% agree with the ideas a political party offers, not even the own members of the political party agree with every detail of the ideology of their political party, in my case on some tests I've performed I don't even reach a 60% of agreement on the ideas with any political party that exists on my country.

So it looks like a much better idea to have some key points which don't overlap or overlap as minimum as possible, let's say around 10, where some range is presented (of course it would be impossible to cover everything, having 4 options per point would be enough) in the form of political parties that are centered on that aspect, things like the economy system, how much would justice punish, the defense of traditios of the country and so on...

The most voted options of that 10 points would be the ones where the country would be built into and by law (constitution) the parties would have to colaborate with each other.

In theory it looks like a nice system, sure not every aspect would be present as that would be completely impossible and of course there would be tension between parties, although I don't think it would be higher like the ones that exist now.

What problems might something like that have or has had? Maybe if has been proved? If so, what results did it have?

Philipp
  • 76,766
  • 22
  • 234
  • 272
kerg
  • 19
  • 1
  • 1
    Sounds a lot like this question: http://politics.stackexchange.com/questions/9670/direct-voting-on-every-issue-referendum-new-political-system (and I bet there are more like that). Please consider if your question is a duplicated of this, or explain why do you think it is not. – SJuan76 Aug 31 '16 at 22:37
  • I think many Pirate Parties have tried something similar with their Liquid Feedback system. It didn't work out too well, partly because voters couldn't know any more what the party stands for. – Sentry Aug 31 '16 at 22:59
  • ahem http://meta.*.stackexchange.com – user4012 Sep 01 '16 at 00:04
  • You're essentially asking for pure democracy rather than representative democracy. The catch with that is it doesn't scale well. –  Sep 01 '16 at 03:12
  • @blip - Sortof. It's more like a simplified form, because you're not voting on individual issues, just your stance on general categories. But how would you translate those votes to leadership? Hmm.... – Bobson Sep 01 '16 at 04:43

0 Answers0