Become a fan of Slashdot on Facebook

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
United States

Journal pudge's Journal: Digg, Slashdot, and Publius 12

Journal by pudge

Digg is a Democracy, Slashdot is a Republic.

The analogy is imperfect, of course: for example, no one elects Slashdot's editors. But it's pretty close. This Federalist article is about controlling "faction:"

By a faction, I understand a number of citizens, whether amounting to a majority or a minority of the whole, who are united and actuated by some common impulse of passion, or of interest, adversed to the rights of other citizens, or to the permanent and aggregate interests of the community.

There are two methods of curing the mischiefs of faction: the one, by removing its causes; the other, by controlling its effects.

There are again two methods of removing the causes of faction: the one, by destroying the liberty which is essential to its existence; the other, by giving to every citizen the same opinions, the same passions, and the same interests.

Madison goes on to say that obviously, you cannot remove liberty or give everyone the same opinion. So therefore you must look into controlling its effects:

From this view of the subject it may be concluded that a pure democracy, by which I mean a society consisting of a small number of citizens, who assemble and administer the government in person, can admit of no cure for the mischiefs of faction. A common passion or interest will, in almost every case, be felt by a majority of the whole; a communication and concert result from the form of government itself; and there is nothing to check the inducements to sacrifice the weaker party or an obnoxious individual. Hence it is that such democracies have ever been spectacles of turbulence and contention; have ever been found incompatible with personal security or the rights of property; and have in general been as short in their lives as they have been violent in their deaths.

Not that I am foretelling Digg's death, violent or otherwise ...

Then Madison goes on to say how a small group of citizens charged with providing for the rights and interests of everyone is more effective, and scales better, and so on. Madison never claims this is a perfect system, but just that it is far better. I tend to agree.

This discussion was created by pudge (3605) for no Foes, but now has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Digg, Slashdot, and Publius More

Digg, Slashdot, and Publius

Comments Filter:
  • But I don't think of slashdot as a republic in any fashion. There would need a be a certain amount of representation by the users in the slashdot editors.
    • Mostly benevolent dictatorship is more like it.
    • For the analogy to work at this level, election is not required. Representation by a few who represent the interests and protect the rights of the many is what matters.

      I already mentioned in the post that yes, election doesn't happen. But that's pretty well beside the point. :-)
      • I honestly think the opinions of the users aren't necessarily reflected by the editors, though. How many MS users are editors? How many conservatives, besides yourself, are editors?
        The editors are mostly friends of Taco and those that help with the code. I don't know if its necessarily a 'representation' of the masses. Maybe a good representation of the vocal masses?
        I understand your analogy, though, so maybe I'm simply overanalyzing it.
        • I honestly think the opinions of the users aren't necessarily reflected by the editors, though. How many MS users are editors? How many conservatives, besides yourself, are editors?

          That's a bit beside the point of the analogy. This is not to say Slashdot is perfect. It's to say that Slashdot does better at protecting against faction, about protecting interests and rights while still allowing for broad freedom.
          • Yeah... I'm glad I qualified the post with the bit about overanalyzing it, cause that's exactly what I did.
            Funny, I'm always the person that gets annoyed when people work on too much of the analogy and not the point....
  • So...does that mean we get to elect Slashdot editors? :)
    • Heh, I feel dumb. I scanned through most of pudge's journal, but missed the part where he discussed this at the very beginning.
      • I added that shortly after posting initially ... so maybe you caught it quickly, before I made the edit. :-)
  • Not really, I just don't get to use my SAT words much. :)

    But yeah, your point is valid. In theory, at least, a small controlling faction will be able to execute better quality control than the unwashed masses 10 times out of 10.
  • I would venture that /. is more akin to the Philosopher King approach.
    Of course, if you read Plato's Letter VII [adelaide.edu.au] where he talks about the difficulties and disillusionment he gained trying to set Dionysius II straight, you might not like the analogy.

    Seriously, though, who cares. Web sites are largely autocratic, whether oligargic or despotic.
    But I am glad there's at least one conservative voice on the staff. The groupthink is tough to contend with and I often fear I don't have the patience.
    • It's true that there is a single King/President/etc. of Slashdot, CmdrTaco. But the overwhelming majority of the content on Slashdot -- journals and comments -- is essentially a free-for-all. It's very much like a Republic: there are certain things that the government protects (civil rights, story content), and all other things (personal matters, comments, journals) are up to the people.

Slashdot Top Deals

Success is something I will dress for when I get there, and not until.

Close