What Use?

[David Marsay]

As a Briton, Mike O's notion of partition sounds dangerous, but it 
would depend on the local circumstances. I think the Phillipines 
should consider some form of federal government with power devolved 
as low as possible. There should be structures that allow regions to 
co-operate on common interests, e.g. foreign policy. You might 
partition into nations but have an equivalent to the EU for the 
Phillipines within a broader economic area. Look around!

 I do not know 
how you prevent large regions from bullying small ones or the nation 
from accumulating powers. In essence, majority rule gives the rule 
to the majority (even PR), so you may prefer something different. 
Systems that work seem to work because none of the population is 
desperate enough to risk upsetting the system. My hope for Northern 
Ireland has been that as both Britain and Ireland became part of 'an 
ever closer union' the dispute would seem pointless. Could something 
similar work for you?  Good luck.

In response to:
> From:          DEMOREP1 at aol.com
> Subject:       RE: What Use?

> Among the more politically primitive countries with powermad oligarchies are
> the U.S.A., the U.K., Canada and the Phillipines.

I think I know what you mean. However, pedantically, I thought the UK 
was politically sophisticated. The aim of much voting theory is to 
avoid the need for politicking. 
The US political system is, I think, based on a quite sophisticated 
balance of power notion. The problem is not being primitive, but is 
in the results.
The UK is at least considering change, but maybe it is only a 
smoke-screen. Personally, I think almost anything is better than FPP 
for single winner elections.
--------------------------------------------------
Sorry, but apparently I have to do this. :-(
The views expressed above are entirely those of the writer
and do not represent the views, policy or understanding of
any other person or official body.