[EM] (2&3) Steve's 2nd and 3rd dialogue with Fred Gohlke
fredgohlke at verizon.net
Mon Jul 20 07:43:04 PDT 2015
Good Morning, Steve
Thank you for the description of the method you suggest. It seems
You asked what I think. I hope you find my comments thoughtful and
worth your effort to consider.
You presuppose a "Paper (or computer) ballot counting method". I take
issue with that presupposition and will explain why later in the discussion.
re: "Imagine that you are a citizen of this village and 15
of your fellow citizens want to be elected."
What do I know about the people who seek public office? For any of them
that I do not know personally, the only knowledge I have is the stand
they profess and the fact that they seek public office. From that, I
must try to figure out their suitability for election. Here are a
couple of thoughts that come to mind:
a) They see themselves as politicians. I share the public perception
that politicians are deceitful individuals. Anyone who, of their own
volition, casts themselves as a politician raises a question in my mind
as to their integrity. That fact, by itself, does not close the door on
them. It is simply one factor that must be considered.
b) They see themselves as worthy of public office. That may be an
indication that their ego exceeds their intellect. It raises the
question of whether they have the humility to serve the public interest.
Without humility, public servants will not learn from their peers.
c) They are assertive. That's a double-edged sword: If their
assertiveness is exercised in the public interest it will be a good
thing. If it is exercised in pursuit of their personal advantage, it
will be destructive.
re: "To discover which 7 of the 15 are to be elected, each
candidate initially stands at a different place in the
Village Hall surrounded by the citizens who most favor
him or her."
How are we to decide which is the best candidate? The description
implies that citizens must make their decision based on where a
candidate stands. How does the fact that a candidate takes a stance
help me determine the candidate's character?
It doesn't, and a candidate's character is infinitely more important
than where he or she stands.
Does the process you suggest expect citizens to take candidates'
character on faith? That is inadequate, as is demonstrated so clearly
by the degradation of modern so-called democracies into oligarchies.
I intended to continue these comments, but a personal matter has
intervened. I will try to continue my remarks in a day or so, but, for
the present, I will simply post what I've completed. I'm sorry. This
I said I would have additional comments on a "Paper (or computer) ballot
counting method". This, too, must be brief. I just want to point out
that there are many ways for people to vote. Casting a ballot is the
least democratic of them.
The way we currently elect politicians to public office is why modern
governments are undemocratic. In the party-based political systems that
dominate modern governments, the right to vote is not evidence of
democracy, it shows that the people are subjects of the parties that
decide the options available to the voters. This subjugates the people
THOSE WHO CONTROL THE OPTIONS, CONTROL THE OUTCOME!!!
If we are ever to achieve democracy, we must devise a political process
that lets the people select the candidates and choose the issues on
which they must decide.
More information about the Election-Methods