maxheld83
commented
10 years ago might also want to compare this with a broader overview of deliberative issues, such as local stuff (bridge, power plant) and the abstract, nationwide, but somewhat less-system-colonised affairs such as medical ethics.
For assisted suicide, it's fairly obvious that the other side may have reasons, and there may be irreducibly ethical and moral questions that can neither be left to experts, nor reasoned or measured out of. It also seems obvious that a simple vote (confer the long debates the Bundestag has had) won't work, and that simple aggregation of party bloc votes would not be acceptable. Of course, these are also the kinds of questions - medical ethics – that may well not require an abstract legal response; much can be left to the "ethical practice" (schwartz sharpe) of professionals. Not so much in taxation. Also, one may wonder why the debate is so different about medical ethics; maybe because it's not obvious how this debate may be colonised by the system, that is, material interests. Again, it's fairly obvious that this will be the case for tax, and as such, the debate may be more complicated and convoluted than necessary, because there's so much system logic and strategic talk in it.