Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak,

There are a well-known for the famous Churchill's phrase "Democracy is a disgusting form of government, but humanity has not come up with anything better". I keep thinking about this phrase all the time and ask myself: Why is there no democracy in China, but this did not stop him from becoming the first economy in the world and in fact the standard of living on average increased sharply. Next to you is an undemocratic great country China, which is free from many demerits of democracy about which you mentioned. Now I wany to ask you: Do you want India to have the same state system as in China? Please watch the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0YjL9rZyR0

I am not worried about the salaries we pay them but the abuse of resources they claim to be spent in our best interests. If you add all the salaries of 435 members of the house and 100 senators and about 5000 in the executive branch in the USA the salaries are incredibly small when compared with the trillions of dollars they waste. Some of that expenditure is not justified and is wasteful.

As to wether they represent me, not always and by its very nature, their job is to accommodate their constituents. Thus, sometimes they make decisions that will antagonize some of their influential constituents. In some cases, we can remove them when they abuse power. Not the case with dictators.

1. Actual democracy is not in practice anywhere in the world. People have to choose one among thieves and the dacoits.

2. In present system of democracy, all citizen is having same voting power. I can say about India, where more than 90% of voter has no idea about country's economic, foreign or industry policy. They are selecting candidate basing this quality of knowledge and issues like caste, religion etc.

3.Corruption is so widespread that many Indian think that most of the politicians perhaps do not require any income for rest of the life, if they can be a part of the power for a term.

Nobody can be able to corelate their lifestyle and income.

4. So far I know the Non Performing Assets of nationalised banks of India is above 10% of total Assets. Somebody has taken such amount of money from the banks and did not returned it.

No main line politician demand disclose of name of these persons.

So, you can understand what is going on in the name of democracy!

Thank you Dr. Shibabrata.

Very important to me to see you share your valuable opinion.

Best wishes.

Prof. Hess

Dear Dr. Amir, you´re right.

The decisions are even worst than the salaries.

Thank you!

Version:1.0 StartHTML:000000325 EndHTML:000026627 StartFragment:000026111 EndFragment:000026423 StartSelection:000026111 EndSelection:000026417 SourceURL:https://www.researchgate.net/post/Technology_has_brought_so_many_new_ways_of_doing_things_Are_we_going_to_vote_personnaly_and_turning_politicians_useless_obsolete var rgConfig={"correlationId":"rgreq-1e24ebe7923b85ae6f1211bef29813f3","accountId":1459792,"module":"topics","action":"topics.TopicPostDetails","product":"qa","continent":"South America","stylesHome":"https:\/\/c5.rgstatic.net\/m\/","staticHost":"https:\/\/c5.rgstatic.net","longRunningRequestIdentifier":"LongRunningRequest.topics.TopicPostDetails","longRunningRequestFp":"9a988e3523aa88fcbdd0011e4885faad466ebb0c","yuiDisabled":false};window.rootUrl="https://www.researchgate.net/" if(typeof YRG !== 'undefined'){YRG.use('rg-base');} Technology has brought so many new 'ways of doing things'....

Best wishes. Prof. Hess

Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak,

There are a well-known for the famous Churchill's phrase "Democracy is a disgusting form of government, but humanity has not come up with anything better". I keep thinking about this phrase all the time and ask myself: Why is there no democracy in China, but this did not stop him from becoming the first economy in the world and in fact the standard of living on average increased sharply. Next to you is an undemocratic great country China, which is free from many demerits of democracy about which you mentioned. Now I wany to ask you: Do you want India to have the same state system as in China? Please watch the video https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s0YjL9rZyR0

Dear Dr. Fedulov,

As an idea, Communism is better than Democracy in many aspect. But I reside in Kolkata, the capital of the state of West Bengal of India.

That state was governed by a front of Communist parties from 1977 to 2011. No, I have many many bad experience about that rule.

As Communism is having a "democratic centralism" system, ultimately the whole power goes under the palms of a few people. From here, corruption starts. As they do not want to hear any type of criticism on their works, corruption become accelerated.

The second weekends of Communism is that no power is given to the people even to speak as per their desire.

I am writing this, but I think no North Korean or Chinese can write against their Governments.

I think corruptions are there in those countries, but the news are not coming out.

For China, I can never support the incidence of Tient un main square.

I think it is the time to formulate a revised

form of Democracy.

Thanks.

Democracy as a system of government encourages massive corruption which hinder development. I compare my country under military rule and this present democracy. One will conclude that democracy has only come to impoverish people. It is a serious problem

leaders are required for the country but weather it is politician or some one not able to comment....

Technology alone with out good visionary leaders cannot be a good maths

I am Agree with Shibabrata Pattanayak

I share the sentiments of professors Humberto, Shibabrata, Emmanuel,Gennady and Amir. Let me add my innate sentiments.

Politicians have overturned the wheels of democracy and swallowed all the good in the society because of their selfishness and greed. Toiling for them via the paying of taxes is seen only as an obligation to the law and not from a pure heart.

Dickson Adom

Dear Shibabrata Pattanayak,

you have designated a very promising phrase "I think it is the time to formulate a revised form of Democracy". However, I would like to know some details of your understanding of "a revised form of Democracy." For example, some countries of Eastern Europe wanted to make socialism with a human face, for example in Yugoslavia, Hungary, Poland. At that time in the Soviet Union many dreamed of coming to Yugoslavia as tourists. Life in Hungary and Poland, too, was much better than in the Soviet Union. However, these are now quite democratic capitalist countries, but the people began to live no better, and perhaps even much worse than in socialist times. If I understand correctly, today's democracy in the world is a democracy with a capitalist face. I want to ask you: is it possible to formulate a variant of democracy with a socialist face? Than this option will fundamentally differ from today's form of democracy. If not, then why? Which form would be better: capitalism with a socialist face or socialism with a capitalist face, as was already the case in Yugoslavia under Broz Tito. And what kind of democracy would be optimal for India, taking into account the mentality of this country. Suggest possible options.

This is a very crucial question. I personally think digital technology can be used in this regard to stop politicians taking unnecessary and politically biased decisions on our behalves. But the question is, will these politicians even allow such a democratic system to function. Definitely NO!.

Dear Harry Barton Essel,

digital technology is not created on its own, but on the orders of the same politicians that you are trying to stop. This technology is then controlled by these same politicians.  Now, modern technologies allow making any decision in which politicians would be interested. Thus, the democratic system is fully integrated with modern technologies  and politicians do not even need to allow anything, the desired result is known in advance. As for us with you,  then here we are treated as а crowd scene, no more. Any democracy by definition requires compliance with procedures like crowd scene even when the result is absolutely predictable.

Dear Fedulov and Essel,

There are some initiatives - at least in Brazil - such as a "signature site" in www.change.org were we can call people to vote important questions the anyone can arise and, when we achieve 2 million of votes (1%) of my country population, we can propose it as a law.

Maybe it´s a beggining...

All my best wishes.

Hess

Dear Prof. Hess,

The 'signature site' initiative you mentioned is a nice initiative & hope it turns into a very fruitful one. But in our country, there is so much information asymmetry that even the public opinion on important issues get swayed by media-savvy vested interests & the public may be led to believe as true that which may be a misrepresentation of actual facts. In a country with high percentage of people with no formal education & no understanding of what laws are beneficial or detrimental to them, it is extremely difficult. Seems yours is a very 'informed society & populace'.

Dear Hemlata,

No. My country is not well informed. But most of people have access to cell phones and internet. Even the poorer. In fact, the consumist behaviour have well established here, for any different reasons. But I totally understand what you are saying. Most of times, I feel that the same that you´ve exposed is true here in Brazil too!

Thanks for sharing your valuable opinion.

Prof. Hess

This is a very crucial question. I personally think digital technology can be used in this regard to stop politicians taking unnecessary and politically biased decisions on our behalves. But the question is, will these politicians even allow such a democratic system to function. Definitely NO!.

Digital democracy will be subject to great electronic manipulations as it reinforces anonymity; direct democracy will be an alternative road for the nearer future (next 50 years); meanwhile, it is better that we know the faces and pay them more than they deserve.

Personally, I feel that politics is a complete waste of time and resources, if you hope to contribute anything... it's the last vocation you've got to look at.

On the questions at hand:

1- Do you feel represented by the votes they do in your behalf?

Yes. And no. As I do not vote, but I feel representative democracy just about functions.

2- Do you agree with the decisions they make?

No. I hardly agree with anything political.

3- Are you happy with the salaries you pay them to do the job?

Yes, higher salaries (as in Singapore's case) reduces corruption. It's inversely related, if research is to be believed.

4- If, nowadays, technology permtis us vote personnally in everything, don´t you prefer to stop paying high salaries and vote?

Nope, society will always form pyramids, there will always be the few with much and the many without much... so, it's a futile exercise. If society needs to organize, you have to live with uneven power sharing.

Fact of life - nature means, there is a hierarchy, you'll always have an alpha. Just a fact of life... there is democracy and then there is anarchy ('direct' democracy).

Do you agree with the decisions they make?

No. I don't agree with political decisions

A form of government (totalitarian, democratic, monarchical, etc.) and the welfare of a state can not be measured only in terms of economic success. Surely the quality of life of people, their fundamental rights (right to health, the right to education, freedom of opinion, freedom of expression etc.) are very important. Occupational safety, environmental protection, air pollution, water and many other things must also be considered. In democratic systems decisions are always taken by more people, in other systems not, in the sense that it is a single man / woman who decides all for everyone. Unfortunately, direct democracy (all the people who vote on every issue more or less relevant) is impractical because ordinary people do not have the cultural tools of knowledge and the technical / scientific information to decide wisely. Politicians, generally, make use of a plethora of experts in every field they deal with. Therefore, at least in theory, they choose according to science and conscience in the name and for the good of the people. Are there many politicians inept, corrupt, incompetent, etc.? Surely. So the problem consists in the selection of the political class.

Dear Dr. Aurelio Hess,

Democratic system is good for society but we the voter are not voting right politician.

Thank you very much for the kind insights, fellow scientists.

All the best for all of you.

Prof. A. Hess

Political class is different than the class of common citizen, economically. They have higher economic capabilities than common people. They get a berth in the Parliament and legislative due to their huge power to expend in the elections (at least in India). They get higher salaries and have capability to hide their properties and earnings other than salaries.

The situation can change. But only then, when honest and accountable people could be in power. Common people should be ethically strong to select good representatives and punish them when necessary.