Answer:
Implementing a direct democracy would require significant changes to the current political systems in place, such as an advanced technological infrastructure, high levels of citizen participation, education on the issues being voted on, and a legal framework to ensure binding and enforced outcomes. While direct democracy has potential benefits such as increased citizen engagement and transparency, it also has drawbacks such as the potential for manipulation by special interest groups, lack of expertise, and being time-consuming and expensive. Therefore, a hybrid approach that combines elements of direct democracy with representative democracy may be the best way to ensure citizen voices are heard while still allowing for informed decision-making.
Step-by-step explanation:
Increased citizen engagement: A direct democracy would provide citizens with greater control over their government and encourage them to participate in the political process.
More transparency: Direct democracy would provide more transparency in the decision-making process as citizens would be involved in the decision-making process.
Better representation: Direct democracy could lead to more accurate representation of the people’s opinions and preferences.
Cons:
Lack of expertise: Direct democracy could lead to decisions being made by individuals who lack the expertise or knowledge necessary to make informed decisions.
Time-consuming: Direct democracy would be time-consuming and require a significant amount of effort on the part of citizens to stay informed on the issues being voted on.
Expensive: The implementation of direct democracy would require significant investment in technology infrastructure and education, making it an expensive undertaking.
Potential for manipulation: Direct democracy could be subject to manipulation by special interest groups who have the resources to mobilize large numbers of people to vote in their favor.