[EM] Elections in microcosm and macrocosm.

[Richard Lung]

Elections in microcosm and macrocosm.

Alfred Tennyson anticipated the so-called United Nations, in an early 
poem of “The Parliament of Man.” The phrase might just as well apply to 
the rational mind of an individual human being, who holds elections and 
exclusions of personal thoughts. The sub-conscious mind amounts to an 
“electorate” that determines those decisions. The introspective 
psychologies of Freud and Jung are largely about internalised social 
conflict resolution. Indeed, depth psychology attempts to resolve deep 
conflicts of instincts and conditionings. Altogether, it is the work of 
the United Nations in microcosm.

The human brain has ceased to be an impenetrable “black box,” since the 
advent of brain-scanning neuro-science. It is possible that election 
science may have a quantitative role to play in microcosmic elections of 
the human mind.

Meanwhile, election science or “electics” has an urgent role to fill, in 
advising on conflict resolution, in the macrocosm of all humanity, or 
human relations in general. Most people are evidently not aware of some 
simple electoral considerations, for promoting peace: Majority elections 
are “the tyranny of the majority” (John Stuart Mill; Lani Guinier) which 
fragment societies of their minorities, seeking to become majorities, in 
smaller units, where they can preside over their own “tyranny of the 
majority.” Thus conflicts multiply.

What is refered to as a majority is not a democracy, it is “only half a 
democracy” (Robert Newland). This type of democracy is more accurately 
described as a single majority, where one representative is supported by 
half the voters. There are also multiple majorities. The next simplest 
majority is a double majority, where one third of the voters are each 
supported by two representatives, giving a proportional representation 
of two thirds of the voters. A triple majority gives a three quarters 
proportional representation, and so on, approaching fully democratic 
representation.

This series of increasing representation is called the Droop quota. It 
is not the last word, in the matter. However, fairly sharing 
representation does away with the need for unrepresented minorities 
tofracture societies, to become their own dominating majorities.

The fractious effect of “the tyranny of the (single) majority” extends 
from legislatures to executives. This tyranny applies to monarchs or 
presidents. Even if the president is an elected monarch, that is 
essentially the ancient Greek tyrant, who was an elected ruler, given a 
free hand. When Quentin Hogg (Lord Hailsham) called Britainan “elective 
dictatorship,” this was a good definition of a classic Greek tyranny.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn rejected party lists. Parties only represent a 
part. The dictator Lenin favored party lists.

Representative democracy requires direct elections. These are achieved 
by the Personal Representation form of proportional representation, as 
described by Thomas Hare and his chief supporter John Stuart Mill (The 
Hare system alias the Andrae system). Following them, HG Wells advocated 
“Proportional Representation with a single transferable vote in large 
constituencies.” Or, as the Australians say, the quota-preferential method.

  Regards,

Richard Lung.


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.electorama.com/pipermail/election-methods-electorama.com/attachments/20220914/361cff13/attachment.htm>