I wonder how many of us are thinking that Internet would be an excellent tool for citizens to use to control their public servants (alien masters)? Aren't present elections far more expensive than they would be if computers were made accessible enough (in public libraries, post offices, schools, police stations, etc.) so that everyone could VOTE via Internet? Everyone could have a Tripod or GeoCities type account on Internet, which could be used for voting for candidates as well as on many other issues, such as immigration, abortion, foreign aid, welfare, etc. Should our public "servants" know what WE want them to do, and how we want them to spend OUR money?

Whose wisdom, integrity, honesty, love for their communities, knowledge, experience, etc. is vastly superior, that of the still great American masses, or that of most career politicians, their handlers and lobbyists? I would feel safer in a REAL democracy because I believe the American people would make far better decisions than America's politicians have. We LOVE our nation.

Are most candidates just auditioning for the special interests who fund their campaigns? Which ever party wins, isn't it usually the same alien anti-American elite that sends our children off to wars, rules and robs us? Internet is a way for citizens and their government to have more frequent interactions of better quality. Even if the Constitution of the USA prohibits a real democracy ("government by the people, for the people, and of the people"), Internet voting could make it harder for the politicians to IGNORE our voices.

The Media often interprets elections to mean Americans approve of issues the Media supports, but in reality we may vote for someone with whom we disagree about everything, simply because we think he is more honest. Candidates usually run on more than one issue, so how can present elections be interpreted to mean anything about any issue? Citizens could use Internet both to vote for candidates and on issues. The expertise of each voter could be certified, so that voters could contribute to decision making in the field of their own expertise, so government could make better decisions about health care or nuclear power, for example. If computers could give us "voter profiles" to show us how each category of experts voted on particular issues, government could take all this expertise into account when making decisions, not just the opinions of lobbyists and their mercenary experts.

Present government hearings only tap a small amount of the expertise (doesn't whoever pays "experts" usually get whatever testimony he wants) of Americans, compared to what voting via Internet would allow.

If voters had secure voter accounts, like bank accounts, they could keep track of their votes just like dollars, and make sure they were counted honestly. Why not just take opinion polls? Are opinion poll takers any more trustworthy than those who own the te-lie-vision and other media?

Could Internet be one of the few places we could get less censored and diverse opinions, like those of most Americans, and my own? What better education could there be for our children than allowing them the freedom to hear many more sides of many more issues than the monopolized media elite allows us to hear now? In a democracy is the education (not inculcation) of the masses not essential?

---

Space for this web page is provided as a service to Tripod members. The contents of this page are the responsibility of its creator, not Tripod, Inc.	Click here to get a screenlife!
Tripod | ScreenLife | Planet Tripod | Search Member Pages | Build Your Own Web Site!