No Pure Democracy?

America ended up with a rep. democracy for some very obvious reasons. First, a pure democracy or a direct democracy exists where the will of the people is translated into public policy directly by the people themselves in mass meetings. Clearly, we see that this type of governments can only be properly ran in very small communities where it is possible for entire towns to meet.
Next, I will address why such a stupid idea of democracy is even thought about, or even considered a possibility in governments. This idea is thought about because of many reasons. First, this idea is even thought about because in direct democracy there is no representaion. They argue this because representaives fomr certain areas cannot fairly indulge themselves in everyones complaints. They cannot handle everyones arguments, this tends to cause for the big cities problems to become most important. People from the small towns may have just as good of a problem or concern yet their voice does not get heard in a rep. democracy where as in a pure democracy it might. Another issue that people bring up when speaking of direct democracy is that people will argue that in a direct democracy the corruption or scandals in governments will be greatly reduced. They argue this because their will be less officials running, things, and therefore less people to put in the spotlight. Although direct democracy does not make the most sense one of the smartest men in history once said ""If liberty and equality, as is thought by some, are chiefly to be found in democracy, they will be best attained when all persons alike share in the government to the utmost." I don't think that it's just me when I say this sounds alot like direct democracy.
Now I will address why people are against direct democracy or for rep. democracy. People will say that rep. democracy makes more sense because of many reasons as well. Rep. democracy works for large cities as well as small cities, where as direct democracy will only work on a very small town. This is because a town that conisits of 100,000 people will not be able to get all those people to one place to vote on something simple that they probaly don't even care about. Second, the process of getting a mass number of people to one place to have them vote on a certain thing, will become slow and very unefficient. It will also cause voter fatigue, because most people in the U.S. probaly do not care about most laws that are passed in the first place. Also in a rep. Democracy there is what you call referendums, these are easily used to make voting easier. With this people will particapte in the voting process more.
“In the view of many modern political theorists, referendums, regardless of their legal form, enhance the quality of democracy through citizen participation in the political process in a way that elections alone cannot” (LeDuc 38).
I believe that rep. democracy makes 100 pervent more sense than a direct democracy. I believe this for many reasons. First, I believe that the matters of out nation should be left up to be decided by the well- educated people of the nation. I know that I do not want Billy Bob from Arkansas that can't read to be voting for something complicated that he doesn't even know what it means.(no disrespect to Arkansas or smart people named billy bob although your parents probaly weren't very smart either) Second, I know that I do not want to travel somewhere far fomr my house stuck in a lot of traffic because everyone in my town is going to vote on whether the Bible should be read in schools or whether teachers should be allowed to use student restrooms,or any restrooms for that matter especially those named Larry Craig.
If you are reading this you should of understood that direct democracy does not make sense if thought about clearly. If a person must travel to far ends of the earth to vote of every little thing, that definately sounds like the smartest way to do buisness.

LeDuc, Lawrence. The Politics of Direct Democracy: Referendums in Global Perspective. New York: Broadview Press, 2003.
Warburton, Nigel. Philosophy: The Basics. New York: Routledge Publishers, 2004.