In a Direct Democracy the majority vote might be opposed to the minority vote, and the majority is not always right. The majority might vote for racist policies or wars of aggression or legislation that goes against the moral view of a minority. How does a Direct Democracy protect the minority?
A Direct Democracy which keep intact the current system of having a Congress and a Senate protects the rights and powers of states that have relatively low populations so that the votes of urban populations do not over power the rural populations. The only difference would be that those populations would have more control over their own representatives.
With our current system, ideally the Courts provide protection for minorities. The Supreme Court can strike down any legislation or regulation that limits the rights on individuals based on race, gender, religion or political view. Is this sufficient? How do we protect the integrity of the Supreme Court with a Direct Democracy?
One Comment Add yours