#AbrahamLincoln: "#democracy is #government of the #people - by the #people - for the #people"

but #democracy is not perfect per default, it needs constant #reform to become better and better (not worse and worse how it was made by (#financial #taxavoiding #lobbyists and other #lobbyists = #corruption)

how to reform democracy? a #conversationwithai: #deepseek

<think>
Alright, I'm trying to figure out how to reform #democracy so that decisions are made faster and are more competent, while also reducing incompetence and corruption. This is a big question because democracy as it stands has a lot of #issues, but it's still considered one of the better systems out there <- read this?

First off, I know that one of the main problems with democracies is that #decisionmaking can be #slow, especially in #large #countries.

There are so many #checks and #balances that sometimes it feels like nothing gets done.

So maybe making decisions faster requires #streamlining some processes.

But how? Maybe reducing #bureaucracy or changing how legislation is passed?

Another issue is #incompetence. I've seen elected officials who don't seem to have the right skills or knowledge for their roles. <- this #AI has seen things!

How can we ensure that #leaders are actually #competent?

Perhaps through better #education #requirements, or maybe having #experts in certain fields advise them more #effectively.

#Corruption is another huge #Problem seems like #money plays a big role in #politics, which can lead to decisions that favor #donors over the people.

#Campaign #finance #reform might help here, but I'm not sure how feasible that is given current laws and court rulings, especially in places like the #US with #CitizensUnited.

#Voter #engagement is also a factor.

If more people participate, maybe there's more #accountability.

But getting people to vote when they feel their votes don't matter is tough.

Maybe changing voting systems, like ranked-choice voting, could make elections feel more representative and increase turnout.

I've heard about #sortition, where #random #citizens are #selected for #decisionmaking bodies.

That might bring in diverse perspectives and reduce corruption since the average person isn't as beholden to special interests.

But would people take it seriously? I'm not sure how effective that would be compared to elected officials.

#Technology could play a role too.

Maybe using #online #platforms for #participatory #budgeting or #policy #discussions.

It could make #government more #transparent and involve citizens more #directly.

However, there's the risk of #misinformation and #manipulation online.

#Term #limits are another idea.

They might prevent politicians from becoming too entrenched and corrupt, but they can also limit institutional knowledge and lead to a #revolvingdoor of #inexperienced #leaders.

#Anticorruption agencies seem necessary, but they need to be #independent and well #funded.

If they're controlled by the government, they won't be effective.

How do you ensure their independence?

#Media #literacy is important because if people are #better #informed, they can make #better #decisions at the #ballotbox.

But with so much #misinformation out there, improving media literacy is a big challenge.

I'm also thinking about proportional representation.

Maybe switching to a system where more parties have seats could lead to more diverse and representative governments, reducing gridlock.

But it might also make forming a government harder if no single party has a majority.

What about making voting mandatory?

It increases turnout but can also lead to people voting without being informed, which doesn't necessarily improve the quality of decisions.

Another thought is focusing on #local #governance.

If more decisions are made at the local level where people can be more involved and informed, it might lead to #better #outcomes #overall.

But not all issues can be handled locally; some require national or international coordination.

I'm also considering how #education plays into this.

Better #civic #education could make voters more informed and engaged.

It starts from a young age teaching about #government #structures, #roles, and the importance of #participation.

#Transparency is key too.

If governments are more open about their processes and decisions, trust might increase. Things like #FOIA requests in the U.S. help, but they can be slow and sometimes
incomplete.

#Incentivizing #good #governance through awards or recognition might motivate leaders to perform better, but it's not a sure fix for deeper systemic issues.

Encouraging #whistleblowers is important because they can expose #corruption before it becomes entrenched.

Protecting them legally would make others more willing to come forward.

Public-private partnerships could bring in expertise from the private sector, but there's a risk of corporate influence if not managed properly.

Inclusive decision-making ensures that all groups have a voice, which leads to more equitable policies.

It requires active efforts to involve marginalized communities.

Independent judiciaries are crucial because they can check the other branches and enforce laws against corruption.

But judicial appointments can be politicized, which undermines their independence.

Finally, cultural shifts towards valuing integrity over power might help reduce corruption. But changing a culture is slow and difficult, especially in large, diverse societies.

Putting all these thoughts together, it seems like reforming democracy requires a multi-faceted approach addressing both structural issues and cultural factors. It's not just about tweaking one part but making comprehensive changes that promote competence, transparency, and accountability while ensuring representation and reducing corruption.

</think>
Reforming democracy to enhance decision-making efficiency, competence, and reduce corruption involves a multifaceted approach that addresses both structural and cultural aspects of
governance. Here is an organized strategy based on the thought process:

### Structural Reforms
1. **Streamline Decision-Making Processes:**
- Reduce bureaucratic layers and adopt more agile legislative processes to accelerate decision-making without compromising thorough consideration.

2. **Campaign Finance Reform:**
- Implement strict regulations on campaign contributions and promote public financing of elections to diminish the influence of money in politics.

3. **Proportional Representation:**
- Introduce proportional representation systems to ensure diverse representation, which can lead to more inclusive and efficient governance.

4. **Term Limits:**
- Enact term limits for elected officials to prevent entrenchment, while ensuring mechanisms for knowledge retention and smooth transitions.

5. **Independent Anti-Corruption Agencies:**
- Establish independent bodies with strong investigative and prosecutorial powers to combat corruption effectively.

### Enhancing Competence
1. **Expert Advisory Bodies:**
- Integrate expert panels in decision-making processes to provide informed guidance on complex issues.

2. **Civic Education:**
- Improve education systems to foster informed voters through civic engagement and critical thinking skills.

3. **Sortition (Citizen Juries):**
- Experiment with sortition to involve diverse citizen perspectives, enhancing
representativeness and reducing corruption risks.

### Reducing Corruption
1. **Transparency Measures:**
- Increase government transparency through open data initiatives, accessible meetings, and robust freedom of information laws.

2. **Whistleblower Protection:**
- Strengthen legal protections for whistleblowers to encourage the exposure of corruption without fear of retribution.

3. **Judicial Independence:**
- Ensure the judiciary is independent and impartial, free from political influence, to uphold rule of law and check executive power.

### Voter Engagement and Participation
1. **Voting System Reforms:**
- Adopt ranked-choice voting and proportional representation to ensure votes count more meaningfully and increase voter satisfaction.

2. **Compulsory Voting:**
- Consider mandatory voting with incentives for informed voting, potentially reducing apathy and increasing political engagement.

3. **Participatory Budgeting:**
- Involve citizens in budget decisions through digital platforms to foster transparency and accountability.

### Technological Integration
1. **Digital Platforms:**
- Utilize technology for participatory governance, enabling real-time public input on policies and fostering informed discussions.

2. **Media Literacy Programs:**
- Launch initiatives to combat misinformation, promoting a better-informed electorate capable of discerning credible sources.

### Cultural Shifts
1. **Incentivizing Good Governance:**
- Recognize and reward ethical leadership through awards or public acknowledgment to promote integrity in governance.

2. **Cultural Values:**
- Foster societal norms that prioritize transparency, accountability, and integrity, encouraging leaders to adhere to high ethical standards.

### Conclusion
Reforming democracy requires a comprehensive approach that combines structural changes with cultural shifts. By streamlining processes, enhancing
competence through education and expertise, reducing corruption through transparency and independent oversight, and engaging citizens more
effectively, democracies can become more responsive, efficient, and just. This multifaceted strategy aims to rebuild trust in governance and ensure
decisions truly reflect the will of the people.

Увидел тут эфир, где журналистка, которая делала рассладования про Оксимирона пришла о них рассказать.

И, если честно, на это было больно смотреть.

Но давайте я сначала объясню почему.

Небольшой дисклеймер: мне насрать на Оксимирона. Я не слушаю его как музыканта и не интересуюсь им как личностью.

А теперь к сути.

Человеку свойственно воспринимать какую-либо информацию в первую очередь эмоционально, а только потом, если она пережила первичный фильтр - рационально. Если вообще на это есть ресурсы.

Когда журналист ведущий эфир задаёт журналистке, которая пришла в качестве гостя вопросы, которые "очевидны" и не нуждаются в объяснениях - он работает с аудиторией. Это очень полезный журналистский и педагогический приём.

Посмотрите, скажем, подкасты Владимира Сурдина про астрофизику. Он будучи кандидатом наук в беседах с гостями задаёт вопросы ответы на которые могут быть известны восьмикласснику. И его собеседники в ответ на такие вопросы не говорят: "Володя, ну ты даёшь! Тебе это объяснять надо?". Они берут и охотно объясняют в подробностях и простым языком.

В этом же эфире собеседница журналиста ведущего эфир реагирует пассивной агрессией на работу с неподготовленной аудиторией.

> Гостья: Я не верю почему я должна вам объяснять почему это насилие!
> Ведущий: Мне кажется, в этом и есть проблема - в нежелании объяснять.
> Гостья: Я сейчас шесть минут распиналась, не убедила видимо.
> Ведущий: Дело не в том, что вы убедили или нет. <дисклеймер>.
> Ведущий: Я работал в этой сфере 30 лет...
> Гостья: *кривляется*
> Ведущий: ... и дело не в том, что я неопытный, а в том, что я старый. Моя аудитория старше меня <...>
> Гостья: Сочувствую.

(дальше ведущий говорит о том, что для старшей аудитории может быть чужда новая этика и могут быть необходимы дополнительные пояснения)

В этот момент у меня случается фейспалм.

И случается он отнюдь не от мысли, которую в итоге выражает немало комментариев под видео: "ну тупая фемка, пришла тут со своей чушью".

А от того, что я не понимаю, зачем гостья пришла вообще на эфир.
И нет, не потому, что "ну тупой ведущий" (в интернетах любят говорить "bigot" в таких ситуациях).

А потому, что это какая-то абсолютная безграмотность для человека, который называет себя журналистом. И сейчас я говорю о гостье.

Какую цель она ставила перед собой когда шла на эфир?
Ну, может быть два варианта в зависимости от того насколько глубоко смотреть:

- Поглумиться над необразованными простолюдинами
- Донести важную информацию до общественности и получить общественную поддержку

Если это была не первая цель, то такое выступление в эфире - это провал.
Пассивная, да и вообще любая агрессия никогда не была хорошим способом завоевать доверие людей. А здесь она одновременно направлена и на ведущего, и на аудиторию.

Результат ожидаем.

Если ты антагонизируешь аудиторию на которую вещаешь, то странно ожидать от неё поддержки.

Если так ходить и рассказывать об общественно важных вещах, то ничего удивительного не будет если через какое-то время эти вещи станут общественно неважными.

Жду в комментах обвинения в том, что я ненавижу женщин или обожаю русский рэп.
(на самом деле нет)