I look at systems, Tyler, and California's measures are already a form of direct democracy. The issues are presented to the voters and they decide the outcome. That is direct democracy (the old fashioned way).

We see the failure of Sacramento, politicians squabbling in inaction, and we see the enormous amount of measures that make decisions that are not well thought-out, sometimes creating lawsuits overturning the outcomes. So, that is still a lot of bureaucracy and wet concrete, to borrow your words. I do not see this as the light of democracy.

I do like how you have passion for this direct democracy. Again, the logic is in place, but the outcome is not smart (enough). It takes care of issues that are not that complicated in a good way. It doesn't take care of the larger and more complex issues. I hope you will agree with me on that without needing to discuss it further. The more complex issues require political leadership, specialists informing the decision and not being pushed out by Joe Average.

Let's talk a bit more about English Canada and the US, because it is basically ruled on what I know as case law. Because a decision in the past was made, future decisions are made based on that prior decision.

I think Canada can count itself lucky that the French also brought in their system that I know as the Napoleonic system because that system requires it to logically based first. All laws in the Napoleonic system must be in agreement with one another. This ensures the separation of the three parts of government, because the politicians make the decisions about the laws. When there is disagreement, the politicians have to fix it up (and not run to judges). The judicial part rules according to the laws, they do not make them (like here in th US where we do not have separation of the powers).

Lastly, let me praise Canada because in outcome (which is far more important than anything else we can discuss) Canada is a more fair nation than any nation in the Americas. (Jamaica, though poorer, is in the same league.) In all other American nations, the gini index is far more slanted, meaning the distribution of wealth if much worse. Canada has the least elitist society.

I know there are things to complain about in Canada, and part has to do with the political system which is still based on the old system (winner-take-all) and partly because the power is more with the provinces than the cities. You live there. You know it better than I.

Glad you know how low the voter participation in Switzerland is. Something is clearly off. Probably too many things about too small of a matter on the ballots.

There is nothing wrong with voters voting once every four years for one chamber, like in Scandinavia, and be done with it. But the election must be fair and square first.

Thank you for your reply. I like your passion.