[EM] Conceiving a Democratic Electoral Process

[Michael Allan]

Fred Gohlke said:
> Are you saying that anyone considering such a concept would have
> difficulty implementing it?  ...

One aspect is impossible to implement.  You cannot control the time at
which "candidates are announced", as you intend.
http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/2012-July/030836.html

More generally, the means by which candidates make their way to the
ballot cannot be controlled.

> re: "Although a moderating/immoderating [primary] electoral process
>       might be conceived, it could never be enforced.  It would
>       require a power that does not exist in our society."
> 
> You are touching on an important aspect of political systems; the
> notion of externally enforcing an electoral process.  If a process
> must be forced on the people, it is, by definition, undemocratic.

More to the point, it cannot be done.  The primary process (processes)
cannot be enforced in a society where human rights are respected.

> If we are to have a stable, democratic process, it must be designed
> so that our natural tendencies strengthen rather than weaken the
> process.  We know that the pursuit of self-interest is a natural
> human trait that, unchecked, can have a deleterious effect on the
> community. ...

To "check" implies a force or constraint.  Maybe you speak
rhetorically here, but my overall impression is that you intend to
remove the political parties from power by imposing some kind of
reform.  That is not feasible.  I am an engineer, and my aim (far from
opposing you) is to help shape your concept so it can be implemented
in the real world.

But leave all that, and please give me your own thoughts: By what
sequence of historical events (1, 2, 3) might we transit from the
status quo to a better future, as you envision it?

-- 
Michael Allan

Toronto, +1 416-699-9528
http://zelea.com/


Fred Gohlke said:
> Good Morning, Michael
> 
> re: "It is here in these independent processes that you would
>       confront 'strong opposition'.  You would have no control
>       over any except your own, contingent even there upon
>       actually being able to implement it."
> 
> Are you saying that anyone considering such a concept would have 
> difficulty implementing it?  I've no doubt that's true.  In fact, it 
> will be true of any concept that is 'different' than the status quo. 
> Although implementation will undoubtedly be a matter of major concern, 
> when considering concepts, the early steps are best devoted to finding 
> the soundness of the precept.
> 
> In this instance, I believe we agree the method we are discussing is 
> passive in the sense that it does not actively seek the best of our 
> people as our political leaders.  Instead, it relies on members of the 
> community assertive enough to make and/or accept nominations for public 
> office.
> 
> I consider this a vital flaw because attempts to achieve democratic 
> outcomes fail when nothing in the process seeks the active participation 
> of the individual members of the community.  Whether or not this process 
> can be implemented is less important than identifying this flaw because 
> we can use the knowledge to ensure that it is addressed in whatever the 
> final conception may be.  For this reason, I'd like to add a goal to the 
> list already offered ...
> 
> 10) The electoral method must seek the active participation of
>      the individual members of the community.
> 
> 
> re: "Although a moderating/immoderating electoral process might
>       be conceived, it could never be enforced.  It would require
>       a power that does not exist in our society."
> 
> You are touching on an important aspect of political systems; the notion 
> of externally enforcing an electoral process.  If a process must be 
> forced on the people, it is, by definition, undemocratic.
> 
> If we are to have a stable, democratic process, it must be designed so 
> that our natural tendencies strengthen rather than weaken the process. 
> We know that the pursuit of self-interest is a natural human trait that, 
> unchecked, can have a deleterious effect on the community.  We also know 
> that lack of integrity is a common failing among politicians.  We can 
> use this knowledge to conceive an electoral method that harnesses 
> integrity to the pursuit of public office.  This suggests another goal 
> for our list:
> 
> 11) The electoral method must make integrity a vital character
>      trait in candidates for public office.
> 
> Fred