This article is a theoretical contribution to the understanding of direct democracy and its properties. It departs from common definitions of direct democracy by distinguishing between a hard meaning, according to which direct democracies are characterized by the fact that legislative initiative and veto rights are extended to the entire citizenry, and a soft meaning, according to which they are not. Building on previous findings, it argues that hard direct democracy profoundly alters the balance of power in representative systems and reinforces the liberal features of democratic systems, such as the independence of checks and balances and the empowerment of minorities. This analysis invites us to understand direct democracies as systems in which representatives of political groups and independent institutions negotiate to find a consensual way to implement legislation, and a direct vote of the people only takes place if agreement is not reached.