[EM] Conceiving a Democratic Electoral Process

Fred Gohlke fredgohlke at verizon.net
Tue Jul 3 08:22:07 PDT 2012

Good Morning, Juho

re: "But also a system where the govenrment offers web pages for
      all candidates to freely express their opinions, and where
      campaign costs are limited to gas for the car of the
      candidate, could be interpreted as a system that guarantees
      full freedom of speech to all candidates."

Are you suggesting that, under such a system, the internet would be the 
only source of information available to the public?  Would you outlaw 
political advertising?  Do you believe the media would cease to exist or 
that the candidates (and parties) would stop using it to sway public 
opinion?  That seems unlikely.

Suppose, instead, we start with a broader base of candidates from all 
groups, partisan and non-partisan.  Suppose the candidates chose the 
winners from among themselves.  Each would have to find out which of 
their peers can be trusted to serve their interest before choosing any 
of them.  Since each of their peers advocate some mix of different 
interests, each would have to yield a portion of their goals to achieve 
the rest.

Such an approach would have a bias toward serving the common interest 
rather than any special interest or party, would eliminate campaigning 
and the cost of campaigning, and would ensure that the candidates were 
carefully examined by people who seek the same public office as themselves.

re: in response to my comment that "The 'best persons' you speak
     of were only best from the point of view of the party.  Of
     course they didn't allow opposition.  As I've said before,
     parties always "seek the power to impose their views on those
     who don't share them."  They don't always succeed, but when
     they do it's catastrophic.  The threat of domination is
     always present in a party-based system.", you said:

     "As well as in a party-free system."

First of all, I'm not seeking a 'party-free system'.  I'm trying to 
conceive a system in which parties do not control government.

In the second place, the suggestion that domination will occur in a 
system where parties do not control government is misleading.  The 
threat of domination I spoke of is the domination of a single party, as 
we witnessed with National Socialism and Communism.  In a system where 
control of the government is vested in the people, the 'domination' (if 
it can be called that) is by the people, not any partisan subset of the 

And finally, why must electoral power be vested in parties?  Why should 
non-partisans be disenfranchised?


More information about the Election-Methods mailing list