[EM] The meaning of a vote (or lack thereof)

[Fred Gohlke]

Good Afternoon, Michael

re: "... every voter has that right (to influence the choice of
      candidates and the issues on which they vote), but is
      forever cheated of it precisely because the election method
      grants no electoral power whatsoever to the voter, but
      instead renders his or her vote entirely meaningless in any
      practical sense.  As you say, it is not "worth a tinker's
      dam."  But if we (this is my hope) can cogently demonstrate
      this failing to the experts in this list, especially in
      terms of the voting mechanisms they understand so well, then
      they will be more open to drawing the larger conclusions
      that seem so obvious to you and me, and I daresay others in
      this list."

And my hope, as well.

Your reference to the experts made me think of Will Durant's 
observations in the preface to the second edition of The Story of 
Philosophy[1]:

   "... philosophy itself, which had once summoned all sciences
    to its aid in making a coherent image of the world and an
    alluring picture of the good, found its task of coordination
    too stupendous for its courage, ran away from all these
    battlefronts of truth, and hid itself in recondite and narrow
    lanes, timidly secure from the issues and responsibilities of
    life."

and

   "... The specialist put on blinders in order to shut out from
    his vision all the world but one little spot, to which he
    glued his nose.  Perspective was lost.  "Facts" replaced
    understanding; and knowledge, split into a thousand isolated
    fragments, no longer generated wisdom.  Every science, and
    every branch of philosophy, developed a technical terminology
    intelligible only to its exclusive devotees; ..."

Let us hope we can find a tiny chink in this formidable armor so we can 
consider the purpose of Electoral Methods as well as the mechanics.

Fred Gohlke

1. pp v, vi, The Story of Philosophy, Will Durant