| How far should the elected representatives of the | | | | the people want. |
| people in a democracy go along with the popular | | | | That way, every time the Parliament votes, it would be |
| choices and what is commonly expressed as the | | | | 100% guaranteed that the voting reflects what the |
| "voice of the people"? | | | | majority of the people are thinking at any time. |
| The question is whether the duly elected | | | | Would that count as the best democracy possible on |
| representatives of the people are a collection of | | | | earth? |
| rubber-stamp holders, mandated to approve the | | | | At the cost of being labeled an "elitist," I'll raise the |
| results of the latest public-opinion survey? | | | | following question just for the argument's sake: |
| If elected deputies have no other obligation but to vote | | | | What is the role of political leadership in a democracy, |
| in accordance with whatever the public wants at a | | | | especially when the "public opinion" is more often than |
| specific point in time, then wouldn't it be cheaper and | | | | not shaped by the mass media and marketing |
| more reliable to have computers deliver that service? | | | | channels and not by a sober and learned discussion of |
| In such a devil's advocate scenario, the public can | | | | the pros and cons of the alternative policies? |
| regularly visit the voting booths placed in central | | | | This is probably a discussion that goes all the way |
| locations in every city. | | | | back to Aristotle's and Plato's alternative visions on the |
| The voting results can automatically be transferred at | | | | nature of the relationship between the "rulers" and the |
| the end of each day to a central computer in the | | | | "masses." An easy solution does not seem to be in |
| basement of the Parliament. | | | | sight. |
| Then the central computer can quickly compute what | | | | |