Would it be possible to have a social direct democracy?
-No, in a socialist society only a few high-ranking member of the communist party have political power.
-No, a direct democracy requires a free market economy which is not socialist.
-Yes, if everyone voted on economic decisions rather than letting markets decide them, then it could be considered a socilaist direct democracy.
-Yes, if the societ was ruled by a king who made the majority of economic decisions, it could be considered a socialist direct democracy.
Ms. Sue?
My answer is the second choice.
I disagree.
A direct democracy has nothing to do with its economic system.
I apologize for the error in my question. It's "socialist direct democracy" which would directly influence the economy. Thoughts Ms. Sue??
Sorry, but your answer is incorrect. The second choice states that a direct democracy requires a free market economy, which is not true. A direct democracy is a form of government where citizens have the power to make political decisions directly, rather than through elected representatives. It doesn't depend on the type of economic system in place.
The correct answer is the third choice: "Yes, if everyone voted on economic decisions rather than letting markets decide them, then it could be considered a socialist direct democracy." In a social direct democracy, citizens not only have the power to make political decisions directly but also economic decisions. This means that instead of market mechanisms determining economic outcomes, citizens collectively vote or participate in decision-making processes to shape the economy. This aligns with socialist principles, where the means of production and distribution are owned and controlled by the community as a whole.