″Every vote counts″
Because all citizens are equal,
the vote of every citizen has the same value.
Here however there is indeed a problem,
because it could
happen that on the specific
issue to be decided upon, citizen A has a
direct interest and is well-informed, while
citizen B has no interest and absolutely no knowledge.
Is it right for the votes of both
to have the same importance?
Our goal is to avoid mistakes,
not to satisfy the desire
of every who wants
to "steer the ship".
If a decision
has to be made
on a specific
that requires special knowledge
unfortunately, most of
our problems are of this kind),
who is most likely
the wrong decision?
• who lives with the problem,
• who has examined it,
has long experience of the
peculiarities that accompany it,
• who perhaps has made special studies,
or the one
hears of the existence of
such a problem for the first time?
we are going to vote
bill concerning education.
One is a teacher.
• He studied pedagogy.
has worked for
years in a school.
lives with the problems
of education every day.
The other is a mining engineer.
much about geology.
is able to organise
the safest and most efficient
operation of a mine.
Whose point of view
is most likely to be correct?
I think you will agree
that we will have
to take the opinion of
the teacher very seriously into account.
It may even be
that the engineer himself tells us:
"Guys, excuse me, but on this problem of
I have no knowledge and I can’t give an opinion".
if the bill referred
we should listen carefully
to the opinion of the engineer.
― So what do you suggest we do?
Should we divide people into
who will be allowed to have an opinion,
and second-class citizens who would not?
Of course not.
What we should be considering
is a system of
modern direct democracy
where every citizen has the right to have
his opinion and to express it with his vote.
But where the vote
of every citizen has a different weight,
depending on how informed he is on the specific question.