Hacker News new | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submit login

This might be a completely crazy thought:

Given technological enablement, why cant govt be more run as a StackOverflow tempered by the elder wisdom of the Supreme Court? Rip the executive branch out and make the president more of a city manager than the political emperor. Absolute power corrupts...

Putting aside the new dynamic of not having an elected executive...what exactly does StackOverflow run, i.e. execute? The job of the executive branch is to execute the laws of the land. StackOverflow is for fostering discussion and finding answers.

I'm not sure what a StackOverflow that has the ability to take action would look like...though judging by HN's frequent unhappiness with SO's moderation actions, I'm thinking it would not be optimal.

You mean Direct Democracy? I suspect folks here would be even more unhappy with policies under that regime.

I for one do not want to live in a society governed by "Twitch plays constitutional law".

> folks here would be even more unhappy

Maybe. But we could have a constitutional direct democracy (to provent the policies which would make us unhappy), in addition to having smaller countries. In the UK, for example, making the counties into states like in the USA, but with direct democracy and rather than having a centeralised government for the whole country have a EU-like meeting as though they were seperate countries. It's a merky idea, but that's what I'm currently in favor for. We should be able to call a referendum to get rid of certain laws but maybe the government should continue to create the laws as means of reducing idiocracy (like in Switzerland, but even that has dumb laws being passed sometimes, but it by far has more personal freedom than in UK/USA in my opinion).

I hope that makes sense, I'm not good with english.

We need more apolitical city managers getting things done and fewer Henry VIII's playing figurehead and having mercurial power to chop heads on a whim (ie JSOC).

The problem isn't necessarily who has the power or how many people are in control of it (the President isn't a monarch, and congress holds most of the power generally). The larger problem is the size of the power and the weakness of the current checks against it.

The way the system works today politicians bribe the public with their own tax dollars and in so doing get to hold onto power and the perks thereof. But even if we make it more direct the problem of people funneling the government trough into their own mouths, to the detriment of society, will still exist and, if anything, be even worse. And that's aside from the explosion of bureaucracy and regulation which has happened and continues to happen which is also a big part of the mess we're in.

Edit: Also I should mention that a lot of the aspects of the system works today which seem like defects (gridlock, slowness, etc.) are there by design. The system is designed so that gridlock is typical and to have a lot of friction on big changes. That ensures that the power of the government isn't subject to random vicissitudes, fads, or slight changes in the balance of power. It takes consistent majorities in public opinion over periods of time to translate into action, or very large majorities to translate into action quickly.

Guidelines | FAQ | Support | API | Security | Lists | Bookmarklet | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact