Massively Collaborative Self Governance

Massively Collaborative Self Governance or Massively Collaborative Direct Democracy is a theoretical form of direct democracy in which all members of a society are able to participate collaboratively and equally in all aspects of their social government.

Technology
Massively Collaborative Self Governance is only possible when the technology required for all members of a society to participate in mass collaboration is available to all members of that society. Many industrialized nations around the world are currently approaching or have achieved the necessary level of technological saturation to successfully form Massively Collaborative Direct Democracies.

Examples
* . is an example of a successful mass collaboration project, the same success is thought to be possible when mass collaboration is applied to government.

*New Zealand Policing Act and ParticipatioNZ. New Zealand allowed people to edit its new policing act and currently has a wiki online encouraging people to participate in government in a massively collaborative way.

Traditional Arguments Against Direct Democracy
Direct democracy has traditionally been criticized for several reasons. Most of these reasons can be resolved when concepts of mass collaboration are applied.

*Scale. Direct Democracy is traditionally believed to only be effective on a small scale. However, mass collaboration has been demonstrated to have success rates that increase proportionally as the number of participants increases. Massively Collaborative Direct Democracies are therefore expected to be most effective on large scales.

*Practicality and efficiency. Direct Democracy is traditionally believed to be slow, cumbersome, expensive, and exhausting. Massively Collaborative Direct Democracies will not suffer from this problem, the burden on any given individual is as large or as small as that individual chooses. Individuals choose whether they want to participate in government activities on a per-issue basis. Some individuals may choose not to participate at all, and the system continues to function ideally. Again, provides a clear example of this concept.

*Demagoguery and Complexity. It is often argued that members of a society do not pay serious enough attention to important issues to make effective decisions. Again, consider that articles attract constructive editing from individuals with knowledge in specific areas. The scope and scale of the project owes its gratitude to small contributions from millions of individuals, and large contributions from thousands of individuals. Massively Collaborative Self Governance will work the same way-some individuals will spend hours each week working on solutions to complex social problems. When they are effective, the rest of society will remain contented. When they are ineffective, the rest of society has the opportunity to join the discussion and work towards effective changes.

*Self-Interest. Critics worry that in a direct democracy, voters will always work towards achieving goals their own self-interest and not towards achieving goals in the best interest of society in general. Theoretically, this trend would give unfair advantages to social groups with the largest populations. However, on a massively collaborative scale, all social groups become small in population compared to the entire collaborative body. Therefore, all groups of people involved will be forced to work together. Nevertheless, Massively Collaborative Self Governance may require a foundation of a rights protection referrendum similar to the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights to prevent unjust actions taken by a majority of the participating population.

*Suboptimality. A recent argument against direct democracy focuses on the potential ability of voters to vote on individual issues rather than on bundles of issues. Further discussion is needed on this subject. More information is available on the majority rule page.

*Manipulation by timing and framing. It is possible that in a direct democracy, the timing and language of legislation can influence voters response to the legislation. Massively Collaborative Direct Democracy resolves this problem by allowing all citizens to participate in the framing of legislation. Laws are not only potentially voted on by all citizens, but open to be written by all citizens.

Criticisms of Massively Collaborative Self Governance
*Access to Technology. Access to the technology required to participate in a massively collaborative direct democracy can exclude economically disadvantaged individuals from participation. These disadvantaged individuals will lack proportionate representation.

Main Menu

See Also

Main Menu