Boes wrote:If the majority of a certain people don't want something, they should be able to refuse it. That's called the freedom to choose.
As I've explained, this conception of democracy as "majority rule" is overly-simplistic and virtually no constitution relies on it, nor do political scientists. The reason being that it doesn't account for the fact that the majority often want to take away the human rights and civil liberties of the minority. That's the point of the wolves and sheep analogy.
If I am Jewish and I want to celebrate Hanukkah on Friday, but the majority of people in my country vote that they don't want any Hanukkah celebrations this year, they have the freedom to choose, but where is my freedom of choice?
Or let's say the majority vote away their own right
to freedom of choice? They have a referendum where 56% vote that they don't want any more referendums, they just want their Leader to take all executive decisions for them. As you can see, the "freedom of choose" raises many more complicated issues than you suggest.
There haven't been any modern states with true direct democracy yet; so how can you judge them?
This sounds remarkably like the mantra "there haven't been any states with genuine communism yet".
Fact is, most governments in the past century, in which more people died because of war than in the combined 20 that preceded it, were (former) indirect democracies.
Correlation does not imply causation. There are various reasons why the twentieth century is the bloodiest. Part of the reason for the high body count is that killing techniques grew more sophisticated and the total number of the population was higher. Many (though not all) of the warmongering and bloodiest societies were dictatorships: Kaiser's Germany; Soviet Union; Hitler's Germany (once he got democratically-elected, he dismantled the apparatus of democracy); Mao's China; Khmer Rouge etc.
Earlier, and virtually the only, examples would be hunter-gatherers.
So you disagree with the mainstream argument that Athens was direct democracy?
Among the countries today which have developed a tradition of direct democracy, the most common example besides Switzerland are Cuba and Venezuela. According to international organizations, Cuba scores very poorly on human rights and civil liberties issues; Venezuela's score is going down as the people vote away their own freedoms at referendums (I mentioned the 15th February one above). http://www.mherrera.org/freedom.htm
. Would you prefer to live in one of these societies with more direct democracy than your own?