[Election-Methods] Challenge: Elect the compromise

[Jobst Heitzig]

Dear Abd ul-Rahman!
> >Range *is* a majoritarian method since a majority can elect whomever 
> >it wants by bullet voting.
> 
> That does not contradict what I wrote. Being a "majoritarian" method 
> does not make the method Majority Criterion compliant. 

I did not claim that is does. But the relevant question in the situation I specified is whether the majority 55% can elect A no matter what the B-supporters do or not.

> Majority rule in aggregative systems is oppressive, which is why few 
> seriously propose pure aggregative, direct democracy. However, in the 
> context of full deliberative context, it is crucial, for, in fact, 
> the alternative to majority rule is not supermajority rule or 
> consensus, it is minority rule, where the status quo favors the 
> minority. 

How do you come to that conclusion? There are of course other alternatives, as the solution of the stated problem will show.

> Majority rule is the foundation of deliberative democracy.

No. Democracy means "the people" rule, not a mere 51% of the people. Majoritarian methods can never be democratic in the basic sense of "democratic". They may only lead to pseudo-democratic state in the long run when majorities shift (which is of course not guaranteed but relies heavily on chance, and seemingly many on this list don't like chance...).

Yours, Jobst

_____________________________________________________________________
Der WEB.DE SmartSurfer hilft bis zu 70% Ihrer Onlinekosten zu sparen!
http://smartsurfer.web.de/?mc=100071&distributionid=000000000066