You can use arrow keys to navigate in the map.
Direct digital democracy can only be realized if every member of society has equal access to the required hardware/software
Humanity has lived under the tyranny of a powerful minority for most of our civilisation. Direct digital democracy would lead to greater representation of humanitys needs, with more needs being met, instead of a rich/powerful minority mainly getting what they want at the expense of everyone else.
Democracy is supposed to be about everyone being involved in making political decisions and getting an equal vote.
One politician cannot equally represent hundreds of thousands - millions of people.
Direct digital democracy would be true democracy, giving everyone a real vote, real representation
There is still better than a direct democracy. (in the sense that we could all vote on any policies and create them).
We should strive for a better system than that.
Adding voting on policies via digital democracy to the current system and having the results included in the house and senate votes would still be a step forward.
It is harder to corrupt the majority of a population than a few representatives. This means the publics needs would get represented instead of a powerful corrupting minorities.
Direct democracy can easily lead towards a tyranny by the majority, something the Founding Fathers of the US tried to avoid.
There is not a viable software to ensure that the election would not be tampered with, making electoral fraud possible an easy way to alter its outsome.
Complete direct democracy is not a feasible future for any country. Just in the US alone, the amount of legislation that is voted on per two year congress period numbers in the tens of thousands. Voters have neither the time nor effort to research or vote on issues that are not important to them.