Sergey Lebedenko

The overview of the ideas of direct democracy

«The idea becomes material power as soon as it spread and seizes the masses. In addition, nobody has heard of the direct democracy today. Not one politician has this idea in his repertoire!». Politicians do not actually discuss the idea of direct democracy. They cannot think about it, as they themselves are the product of representative democracy. A common mistake is the notion that the power of an idea is in its spread. The units that were slandered shared atomistic ideas in the science of the early 19th century, and one of them, Boltzmann committed suicide, unable to withstand the moral terror of scientists. Nowadays the atomistic idea is the basis of scientific thinking. So, the quality of the idea, its truth is determined not by the spread of it in the minds, but by whether it makes life more effective. The wide spread of an idea does not indicate its viability or truth…
People already know that you can choose a very talented fair and brilliant person, but he will quickly spoil, playing by the rules of the game of representative democracy. This is indicate of a deep crisis of the idea of representative democracy. A representative democracy has been outdated. Today, it is not the democracy anymore. It was the best way to ensure the dominance of a small number of representatives of global financial capital over peoples. It is in representative democracy, through the electoral system and parliamentarianism, which legitimizes bribery in the form of lobbying, implemented an unusually effective formula of enrichment: «money – power – money».
The genuine authority is inalienable from the citizen. It is only after creating a system of the direct democracy that the citizen will stop transferring power to the representatives and will use it on its own. Alternatively, maybe revive the Councils? Because the Councils emerged as a form of direct democracy. The revival of Councils in the form of representative democracy with its electoral system will lead to boundless domination of the country's financial and other capital from top to bottom through the mechanism of local government.
The practice of elections - shameless and brazen, openly bribing votes against the background of the destruction of universal values has become an ordinary phenomenon with which a person is almost used. So, the Councils emerged as a form of direct democracy. However, in the struggle for power, the Bolshevik Party turned the Councils into one of the driving belts of domination of one party. The real Councils have acquired the external form of representative democracy, and in fact were the drive belt of the power of the party nomenclature. Direct democracy was destroyed…
A little bit of history: each nation in the development of their statehood experienced a long period of direct democracy. All the regional cities of Kievan Rus had the organs of direct democracy in the form of the People's Assembly, Veche. Princes were invited to govern, and as such were only users of power, not carriers of it. They governed by contract. The real holders of power were the citizens of this Community. Another thing, when the princes managed to completely seize power, as it was done in the Moscow principality with the help of the Golden Horde. However, this was not a natural, but a deformed development.
With the growth of states, direct democracy became impossible for the following reasons:
  1. Due to the limited capabilities of the natural means of communication on which it was based.
  2. The current regulations of the People's Assembly with the increasing number of participants complicated the decision-making process. The meetings and Veche became incapacitated and more like rallies than meetings, where a decision is worked out.
  3. The possibilities of bribing and manipulating the majority of votes have increased. It is not difficult to organize the crowd for destructive actions and various lawlessness.
  4. Decent citizens were unwilling to take on the burden of power and refused to attend the meeting, and instead of them at the meeting came lumpen and bribed mouthpieces. The citizen was not obliged to be a member of the Assembly.
The lack of experience in the population's participation in meetings, as well as the art of manipulating the opinion of the majority, made possible domination in the meetings of small groups of people who sought to make decisions for their own benefit. This weakened the State, as citizens were unwilling to comply with laws passed against their will, which also contributed to the increase in violence…
Date: 15 October 2019