[EM] Idiots and tyrants?

[Wiseman, Julian]

Or neither, just someone who has observed SMP work well in practice in that
part of the real world called the United Kingdom. Perhaps others are better
(as I've written elsewhere, my preferred system is described at
http://www.jdawiseman.com/papers/electsys.html), but SMP is neither idiotic
nor tyrannical. 

Minority representation is a mixed blessing. A system that penalises small
parties does give Communists and Fascists an incentive to take their pick
from the more mainstream parties. In a Europe that has just started the
largest economic experiment since Bolshevism (consider the word carefully),
I very much favour electoral systems that penalise the extremists. SMP does
so clumsily (see URL), but compared to pure PR, is a great result for the
blacks and Jews who don't want the anti-immigrant parties holding the
balance of power. A system that elects a single-party government is much
preferable, and that isn't classic PR or its obvious variants. 

> -----Original Message-----
> From:	DEMOREP1 at aol.com [SMTP:DEMOREP1 at aol.com]
> Sent:	Wednesday, July 28, 1999 8:09 AM
> To:	election-methods-list at eskimo.com
> Subject:	Re:  RE: [EM] U.K. Voting Systems, 3rd edition
> 
> Any supporter of pure single member districts is a math idiot and/or a
> tyrant.
> 
> Simple 3 district example--
> 
> District     Party A votes    Party B votes    Total
> 
> 1                 49                      51                    100
> 2                 49                      51                    100
> 3                100                      0                     100   
> 
> Totals       298                    102                    300
> 
> Party B has 2 of the 3 seats with a mighty 102/300 or 34 percent of the
> votes.
> 
> In a larger legislative body, the plurality system (the infamous first
> past 
> the post system) results in around 25-30 percent indirect minority rule (a
> 
> plurality in a bare majority of the districts with only 2 parties per 
> district and equal voters in each district) (which becomes less than such
> 25 
> percent in multi-party elections (as in the U.K. or Canada).
> 
> Democracy (for the enlightenment of the Monty Python type retards/ idiots
> on 
> this list) means indirect majority rule (or direct majority rule depending
> on 
> the election system).
> 
> Thus, the use of SMD is an exercise in tyranny (i.e in electing an
> elective 
> oligarchy) in every election.
> 
> The Democracy remedy- proportional representation (to get BOTH indirect 
> majority rule and minority representation).