<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="content-type" content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<br>
<big><big>To all,<br>
Social choice theory seems to deny fairness of elections without
an adequate fairness criterion. The Oxford dictionary defines
fair as equitable, which is to say proportional. Obviously,
then, according to social choice theory there is no fair
electoral system, because its rules do not allow for the
proportional count criterion of fairness. (It is based on
preference voting - necessary but not sufficient - Iain Maclean,
Democracy and New Technology.)<br>
It recently occured to me that social choice theory is an
ethnocentric apology for the hounding of proportional
representation from some 20 American cities. <br>
<br>
From<br>
Richard Lung.<br>
<br>
</big></big>
<pre class="moz-signature" cols="72">--
Richard Lung.
E-books (mostly available free or reader-sets-price)
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext" href="http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/colverse.html">http://www.voting.ukscientists.com/colverse.html</a>
Includes the series of books on:
Democracy Science (starting with electoral reform and research);
Commentaries (literature and liberty; science and democracy);
Collected verse (in five books).</pre>
</body>
</html>