What is an example of direct democracy?

Direct Democracy is simply the concept of a democracy in which voters are able to directly impact specific issues and policies, rather than voting to give a representative or party, a mandate to decide upon policies and issues. One type of direct democracy is the referendum. In British Politics, referendums have only existed for forty years, although they have become more frequent more recently. British referendums are mostly based around consitutional issues, such as the 2016 Brexit Referendum, or the 2011 Alternative Vote Referendum. Switzerland is a more direct democracy than the UK, for instance they had a referendum in 2009 on the building of new Minarets. A true and perfect direct democracy would have votes on all legislative matters, in the model of Ancient Athens, although in a modern democracy this would be unlikely to work. 

A more direct democracy enables more people to directly impact politics. This can also be achieved through increasing political participation. One way to do this would be to make voting compulsory, although many people see ethical and practical issues with this. Other ways to achieve greater political participation are through lowering the voting age and compulsory political education for young people. It is thought that these measures lead to a more engaged political populace and therefore a more efficient democracy. 

a New England town meeting

Explanation:

I dont know if this was the question for whatever homework or quiz you were taking but for future people-

2.  Which of the following is an example of direct democracy?

a New England town meeting

the state government of Texas

the U.S. federal government

the United Nations

the correct answer is “opportunity cost”. opportunity cost is what a company misses out because it decided in one option over another one. in this case, the company decided to invest in building a factory so it gave up another possible benefit or profit in order to achieve success with the factory.  

trade-off is not the correct answer since it is a situation in which you accept losing something in return for benefits in other areas.

and finally, consequence is a general term used to accept what it comes when you make a decision. it can be a positive or negative consequence depending if the decision you took was the correct one.  

abraham lincoln, according to anyone who was connected with agriculture, represented the worst of northern politicians. shortly after lincoln was elected, south carolina seceded from the union. they along with other southern states, retained their anger. in a way, it was their own fault: the democrats were split in the south. some wanted slavery to be extended in other states that were about to join the union and some didn't want it badly enough. lincoln had a solid backing from his party: the republicans were united in not wanting slavery to be expanded.