174-1-797
CALIFORNIA IN THE 21st century faces a question that would fascinate the classical and Enlightenment thinkers who influenced America’s founders. Most of them stipulated that participatory democracies must be small. Their populations should be culturally homogeneous. And they must be virtuous.
California, though, is the most populous and diverse state in America, and no more or less virtuous than any other modern society. The historical achievement of America’s federal constitution was to create a republican structure that would preserve liberty and stability even in a large and diverse society. The price was to make democracy indirect and less participatory. Can California avoid paying that price?
The next few years in California might see the liveliest debate about freedom and governance since Federalists and Anti-Federalists argued in 1787-88 about the new constitution. This special report has shown how one of the three ingredients of direct democracy, the initiative process, has, cumulatively over the past three decades, caused much of the dysfunction that paralyses California whenever it suffers an economic shock, as it is doing at present. Does it follow that California must get rid of the initiative process?
It is a moot question because Californian voters would never agree (in what itself would have to be an initiative) to end initiatives. Ronald George, California’s former chief justice, says that “people will never vote to give up their own power.” The best we can hope for is to make the process “less extreme”.

A. 어휘
classical and Enlightenment thinkers 고대 그리스 및 계몽사상시대의 사상가들.
stipulate 규정하다, 조건으로서 요구하다.
participatory democracies 참여(직접)민주주의. homogeneous 同種(동종)의.
virtuous 도덕성이 높은, 高潔(고결)한. diverse 다양한.
republican structure 공화주의 구조. preserve 보존하다.
stability 안정. liveliest 가장 활발한. governance 통치.
Federalists 연방주의자. ingredients 成分(성분).
initiative process 국민발의 방법. cumulatively 累積的(누적적)으로.
dysfunction 기능장애. paralyses 마비시키다. moot 토론회, 미결의.
a moot question 논쟁점. chief justice 대법원장. extreme 극단적인.