alternatehistory.com

This is not an ideology that I would support. It's merely one that I think would be interesting to see develop. The POD that led to this was a much more widespread Shay's Rebellion that consisted not only of pissed off farmers but other groups frustrated with the early American government, like Revolutionary War veterans. I'm also thinking of making earlier attempts to tax the people, reminding many of them of the Crown and possibly a much earlier president of my father, George. Shay's Rebellion ends up engulfing one group after another, until an uprising occurs, carried out by many people end up being pissed off at a government that semingly doesn't listen to them.

They decide to do away with that problem with this ideology (let's call it a "plurocracy" for now). It's essentially absolute control by the majority opinion of the common people. No two-faced representatives. For bills proposed by national legislators (who consist only of senators) to be passed, they must have the highest public support out of all other options. There ia no judicial branch as something is legal as long as the majority says it is.

What I ask is if it's possible for a plurocracy to form in this circumstance and if it could function later. What I mean by functioning is the country being able to survive and not collapse. If it's a dystopian tyranny of the majority, it's still functioning. And what would happen if plurocracy was implented? Would it turn into a dystopia? Please consider social polarization, which is when a group of people with a similar opinion talk about it, they all end up having more radical views on the subject. This could severely effect wars and foreign relations.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please tell me. Thank you for answering.
Top