Demoex is an experiment and this is the hypothesis: More democracy leads to better policy even in a welfare society.
Extended democracy has a great cost for people with control needs. If we rise the degree of democracy it will become difficult to predict and control the results. Demoex stands for no policy and no organizational hierarchy. Instead of a strong party leader we have referendums on all political points of issue.
Why? Democracy is a luxury, you would think. Many believe that if the choice is between being able to eat his fill and be able to vote, so considering the latter easy. It should perhaps join in. On the other hand the Nobel Prize winner Amartya Sen has shown that democracy usually leads to peace and prosperity.
Are we interested in democracy per se, or is it rather the good effects we aim for? Why do we have democracy at all? Why not monarchy, plutocracy, or any other form of government? Is it because people should have more influence, or it is because democracy is an excellent method to make intelligent decisions?
I would argue the latter. If more democracy would lead to deep conflicts and reduced quality of life, I would never advocate it.
A failure or success? 
Leave a Reply