A while back I wrote about visualising the shape of British democracy based on the 2005 general election results.
The starting point was a typical 'long tail' graph as discussed by Chris Anderson in his book of the same name (example below).
When plotted out, the 2005 results for each party (every independent candidate is counted as a separate party as they stood on their own platforms) illustrated how the electoral system pushes most votes towards the top handful of parties and flattens the tail in comparison to typical power law distributions seen elsewhere.
As you can see, not much has changed.
In my original post I wrote about the forces which act to constrain the distribution of votes.
Rather than repeat myself again, I thought it worth considering a different point that is illustrated by the graph.
This is the degree to which it shows the vested interests that work against greater eDemocracy.
If technology is used to create something that more properly resembles a "long tail" in the distribution of votes, then that means more support moving from the major parties to their smaller rivals.
Obviously the major parties which have control over the electoral rules have little interest in eDemocracy reforms which make this more likely to happen.
And this, I think, is one of the major blocks on greater eDemocracy.
This is not to say that more eDemocracy is impossible, but rather that it will often have to be forced onto the political system from innovation taking place outside it.