Hacker News Reader

Comment by BitwiseFool | Hacker News Reader

Our local library wanted to put in an automated drop-off bin that patrons could drive up to and return books into. It was bitterly contested because the adjacent home owners association was worried about the increased noise and traffic. Keep in mind they were already living next to this library and it already had a parking lot. The city paid to construct a high wall as a compromise. It wasn't terribly expensive, but it wasn't cheap either.

I really do think there is such a thing as "over democratizing" our development process. Sometimes you really do just need to tell someone "this is getting built" and they can get bent if they don't like it.

View on HN

Agreed 100%. You may like this article, that has academic research to back up your thoughts— Not Everyone Should Have a Say; To speed up permitting for energy projects, we’ll need to rethink community input:

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2022/10/environmen...

This sort of "participatory democracy," where the most motivated can dominate those with less time, can be traced back to the New Left, which was criticized by social democrats at the time.

https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/a-day-in-the-life-of...

And it goes back further to the 30-40s where communists would drag out meetings late into the night in order to thin out the crowd, and then wait until they had a majority for a vote.

Jerusalem Demsas is a fantastic writer. One of the highlights of my year was getting to meet her and say "thank you" at the YIMBYTown conference in Portland.

The commoner should have a say, unless they oppose the ideas of Those Who Know Best. The bureaucracy is made of Those Who Know Best. The commoner wants Things to be Better but is worried that changes will make their lot worse.

The commoner has few choices: find other commoners with reasonably similar concerns and use the power of numbers (and perhaps law) to represent their concerns to The Powers That Be (union, HOA, PAC, gang/mafia/mob/activist, some voters); capitulate to Those Who Know Best and hope Things Will Get Better (other voters, slacktivists, Eternally Online people); or, wait for Someone Else to rectify the concern (Enlightened Centrists, anarchists, 9-5ers, mostly everyone else).

Lots of other options and variations are possible, but I can't think of them at this time.

I don't have a point, I just wanted to document a stray thought you inspired.

> the power of numbers

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but isn't that the point of democracy? If enough people agree with your view then that's what gets implemented. The point of the parent is that you can't let people with the loudest voices and most free time abuse the system.

Where I live in a town of about 100K, 46,000 people voted in the election for mayor.

If there's a hearing for some project, maybe 10 or 20 people show up, mostly old, wealthy people who 'got theirs' and want to complain about change.

People's votes are a far more inclusive way of letting 'the commoner' have their say than hearings at 11AM.

>>I really do think there is such a thing as "over democratizing" our development process.

I 100% agree, though think a better way to term it is over localizing and over veto-abling governance over the development process. Democracy means collective control, with one vote per person. Not necessarily that the votes on each decision are held at a very local level, and certainly not each person/voting-block getting a veto.

Take Japan: it has a democratically elected national government, and that government controls all zoning, with local municipalities having no say. That's both democratic, and pro-development.

HOI is some damn dystopia on its own.

> I really do think there is such a thing as "over democratizing" our development process. Sometimes you really do just need to tell someone "this is getting built" and they can get bent if they don't like it.

If they pay me market value plus 35% for being unexpectedly uprooted, that's OK. If the gov wants to steal it, things will get interesting.

That's more of a NIMY - Not in My Yard kind of thing.

I think the parent post is referring to the library example. At a certain point you don't get to keep the land around you from being used in any way other than it was exactly when you moved in.

Eminent domain is a different issue that should have a much higher barrier to use, and has likely been abused historically.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com