[EM] How to fix the flawed "Nash equilibrium" concept for voting-theory purposes

[Fred Gohlke]

re: "People vote for social reasons.  In particular, voting
      appears to have a largely communicative rationality behind
      it.  People like to express themselves.  They also see it as
      their social duty, and so they feel bound try their best
      (despite the hurdles we sometimes put in their way).  Much
      follows from this, including a need to improve our voting
      methods (big hurdle).  But wow! you guys are headed in
      exactly the wrong direction!

      Or am I wrong?"

No, Michael, you are not wrong.

It is a tragedy that bright and thoughtful people can not look beyond 
the arcana of their favorite counting method to recognize and ponder the 
real problems of modern, so-called democracies.

Over two hundred years experience with party politics informs us that, 
when politics is based on partisanship, the partisans form oligarchical 
power blocs that become an end in themselves and ultimately transcend 
the will of the people.

Partisanship is a potent tool for those with a thirst for power but it 
does not foster government by the people.  It results in government by a 
small fraction of the people.  For the people as a whole, the flaws in 
party politics are devastating.  Their cumulative effect victimizes the 
public by the most basic and effective strategy of domination --- divide 
and conquer.

Parties are important for the principals: the party leaders, 
contributors, candidates and elected officials, but the significance 
diminishes rapidly as the distance from the center of power grows.  Most 
people are on the periphery, remote from the centers of power.  As 
outsiders, they have little incentive to participate in the political 
process.

The challenge of representative democracy is not to divide the public 
into blocs but to find the best advocates of the common interest and 
raise them to leadership positions as the people's representatives.  To 
meet that challenge, given the range of public issues and the way each 
individual's interest in political matters varies over time, an 
effective electoral process must examine the entire electorate during 
each election cycle, seeking the people's best advocates.  It must let 
every voter influence the outcome of each election to the best of their 
desire and ability, and it must ensure that those selected as 
representatives are disposed to serve the public interest.

How can those ends be achieved?  Speaking of contemporary reform debates 
in Creating Deliberative Publics, Archon Fung of Harvard University has 
pointed out that few authors have "offered new, more fitting, political 
institutions to shore up civil society and reconnect its citizens to one 
another and to their state."  Filling that vacuum would be a worthy task 
for those considering Electoral Methods.

Fred Gohlke