neo-democracy in the Digital Age

Here is a pressing question: why, in a period of time characterized by speed, digitalization, and interconnectedness, do we live in a constitutional republic?

Democracy is defined as government by the people, and democracy as we know it has virtually always been limited in some way. The normative democratic mode as has been practiced throughout most of western culture is republican in nature (in the constitutional republic sense, not the party-of-no sense). In a republic, representatives are elected to serve in a parliamentary body, which is usually charged with the dual task of proposing and refining laws. This is the system through which the American government exists, and we are thusly familiar with the process of electing our senators and representatives. Those representatives go on to serve in our parliament, which we happen to call congress and which happens to be arranged in a bifurcated way.

The idea is that the people express their opinions on what should happen by electing representatives who reflect those opinions, those representatives go on to propose and vote on bills, which, by gaining the support of a majority of other representatives, eventually become law. For our purposes, the checks and balances of the American system are unimportant. The gist is that the opinion of the majority of the population, through proxy of their representatives, becomes expressed in law. To refresh, a democracy is a system in which the majority opinion of the people is the determining factor in what ultimately governs those people. A republic is a form of democracy in which that majority opinion is expressed by proxy through elected representatives, who ultimately govern the people.

Now, reach in your pocket. Or train your eyes on the table next to you. Something. What do you find? If you're like most people, you find sort of tiny digital cellular device that you can use to make phone calls. Indeed, some might go so far as to call it a cell phone. The point here is that most of the conscious population in the year 2010 has one of these. Every individual typically has a unique number that they can be reached at so that they can exchange specific information with specific people with no regard for distance. 


So we have devices that let us send information over long distances at very little cost, we each have a unique one of our own, why not use these things to vote? On, say, everything? Why do we tolerate living in a governmental system designed specifically for a time in which such a thing was simply not possible? Once you recall that the entire purpose of having a parliament is to enact the majority opinion of the people, why do the people even bother with a parliament any more? Gigantic national opinion polls are already conducted on 'the issues' regularly. Why not develop those polls to become more secure, more refined, and finally codified into a system of parliament? The technology to do such a thing already exists, and has existed for at least a few decades now. It is only a matter of time before the first western country adopts such a system, as such a system is the logical conclusion of democracy as we know it. America's people could be the first!