This article examines arguments for direct democracy as the most authentic form of democratic governance through the lenses of Rousseau and Mill. While Rousseau championed direct citizen participation as essential for preserving individual liberty and the general will, Mill advocated for representative systems that balance civic engagement with practical governance. The analysis reveals tensions between ideal participatory models and their real-world applicability, concluding that while direct democracy offers normative appeal, modern societies often require hybrid systems that incorporate elements of both direct and representative democracy to ensure both legitimacy and effectiveness.