|
Bald Stalin posted:Climate change aside, one need only look at the deteriorating material conditions in places with rcv to see that it's dumb to think this one weird trick will help I don't see anyone arguing that rcv would solve absolutely everything, or that once a place adopts rcv that nothing else matters.
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2024 22:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
it probably wouldn't hurt
|
|
#
?
Jan 15, 2024 22:14
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Climate change aside, one need only look at the deteriorating material conditions in places with rcv to see that it's dumb to think this one weird trick will help
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 02:53
|
|
|
Sivart13 posted:care to offer an example? Sure. Australia not only has rcv (or preferential), but voting is mandatory so almost everyone votes. Despite this, it's essentially a 2 party state (acting more like factions of a single party that ultimately serve the interests of corporations and billionaires). It has been a 2 party state for over 90 years, despite having rcv for over 100 years, even though when voters there can often rank 5+ parties, sometimes 10+ in densely populated areas. Despite having rcv, Australia's center left party (not their center right, funnily enough) was the first to begin the neoliberalization of their society. Their public housing system is being slowly dismantled, their public healthcare system is being slowly defunded, workers rights are being slowly eroded (helped by their center left Labor party rofl). Life expectancy has dropped. The gap between rich and poor has increased. Homelessness has increased. Alll the societal gains made in the world wars period and post war boom, similar to all the gains that happened in no-rcv western countries, are slowly being eroded, similar to the no-rcv countries. Rcv didn't stop capitalism from doing it's Thing in Australia. Bald Stalin fucked around with this message at 03:51 on Jan 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 03:48
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Sure. Australia not only has rcv (or preferential), but voting is mandatory so almost everyone votes. Despite this, it's essentially a 2 party state (acting more like factions of a single party that ultimately serve the interests of corporations and billionaires). It has been a 2 party state for over 90 years, despite having rcv for over 100 years, even though when voters there can often rank 5+ parties, sometimes 10+ in densely populated areas. Despite having rcv, Australia's center left party (not their center right, funnily enough) was the first to begin the neoliberalization of their society. Their public housing system is being slowly dismantled, their public healthcare system is being slowly defunded, workers rights are being slowly eroded (helped by their center left Labor party rofl). Life expectancy has dropped. The gap between rich and poor has increased. Homelessness has increased. Alll the societal gains made in the world wars period and post war boom, similar to all the gains that happened in no-rcv western countries, are slowly being eroded, similar to the no-rcv countries. Rcv didn't stop capitalism from doing it's Thing in Australia. Not that I really have any special insight, but my understanding is the green party actually has made a reasonably good showing in several places in Australia and represents a significant enough bloc that they have say in what policies get implemented. Obviously RCV doesn't fix having a lovely electorate, but if you believe there are policies that have majority popular support but aren't getting implemented then having a third party which can form around a single issue or a small set of issues is a good way to force a political machine to the table in a situation like California's E: if you really wanted to make an argument along these lines I think the kind of example you want to give would be one of the countries that routinely fails to form a coalition government and has too weak of a mandate to pass much of anything, but I don't know how many of those are RCV elections in the first place. BougieBitch fucked around with this message at 04:32 on Jan 16, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 04:30
|
|
|
And yet the material conditions are deteriorating in Australia. Not a personal attack, but I don't see how any of what you're mentioning matters when ultimately things are getting worse, not better, with rcv, and how things got better temporarily for some without rcv in other countries. The problem isn't how these government are structured or "chosen". It's the way society is producing and distributing the necessities of Life.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 04:39
|
|
|
Qtotonibudinibudet posted:huh, for some reason i thought Lee was doing a lot better in the senate race from being the most established candidate, but i guess nah, the centrism is strong https://www.politico.com/news/2024/01/12/new-poll-shows-ca-senate-contest-still-in-flux-00135319 Porter vs. Schiff would be a decent choice.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 04:43
|
|
|
i don't think RCV will solve policy issues, but it will avoid wondering about whether you should do tactical voting or whatever nonsense right now if you prefer Lee but have Porter as a second choice you may legitimately worry that voting for Lee in the primary results in a scenario where Lee loses and Porter also narrowly loses to Garvey, so you should vote for Porter instead. RCV avoids that
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 18:23
|
|
|
RCV would be a little better which makes it worth doing. It not fixing all of our problems doesn’t mean we shouldn’t do it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 16, 2024 19:50
|
|
|
geographic representation sucks wtf do I have in common with my neighbor the chud that means we both have to have the same legislator preposterous method of representation invented when people had to walk to the general court to advise the crown governour general before literacy and politics Greg12 fucked around with this message at 01:39 on Jan 17, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 17, 2024 01:33
|
|
|
This isn't California politics chat per se, but I've ran into a few people here in the bay area and LA that follow this profile: They oppose using gender pronouns, and don't want LGBT topics to be discussed in schools. The fear is that if you tell a kid about what a trans person is, they're going to suddenly want to become trans and you're brainwashing these kids to be LGBT. They may also bring up pedos and how MAPs want to be recognized too, because "where do you draw the line"? All of these arguments are pretty easy to beat - the line is consenting adults. It's not even a line, it's the grand canyon. This is like when people said "oh now they're gonna marry people with dogs". No one is going to suddenly "become gay" or "become trans" because they heard about it. They're only to find out who they already were, which will help them deal with the challenges that come with that and find community. I always find myself lost for words when I encounter these people, because all of this seems so obvious to me, and I'm not sure if they're already lost or if there is something I can say that will persuade them. A lot of what they say feels like talking points as well, like somebody told them this poo poo and then they're just repeating it. Can I have a meaningful argument, and what can I say that could change their mind? E: Greg12 posted:geographic representation sucks Really nothing more than that you both agree that you're human beings that have a right to your beliefs and the freedom to argue for them and make them reality through democratic politics, as long as those beliefs don't involve harm to the other person. Trying to create a society where everybody agrees on everything is impossible, you're always going to have pluralities and competing interests. Societies that stray from these principles generally suck to live in and fall apart easily. I'm not talking about China, I'm talking about Saudi Arabia or North Korea. It's hard to do a society like this well though, because people are not rational and you literally have to engage with every person individually. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 05:13 on Jan 18, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 04:56
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:Really nothing more than that you both agree that you're human beings that have a right to your beliefs and the freedom to argue for them and make them reality through democratic politics, as long as those beliefs don't involve harm to the other person. i mean, given that his neighbor called him a chud i hesitate to give him the benefit of the doubt on any of those
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 07:29
|
|
|
The CHUD political profile in general lands on the wrong side of the "do my politics directly hurt other unrelated people on purpose" test about as badly as Germany did in the lead up to fascism, so that's neat
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 07:57
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:The CHUD political profile in general lands on the wrong side of the "do my politics directly hurt other unrelated people on purpose" test about as badly as Germany did in the lead up to fascism, so that's neat Democrats politics directly hurts people too. You have the top democrat directly assisting in genocide right now.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:17
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Democrats politics directly hurts people too. You have the top democrat directly assisting in genocide right now. Unfortunately we have to choose between evil and more evil.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:21
|
|
|
https://x.com/getfiscal/status/1717760130022813838?s=20 https://twitter.com/getfiscal/status/1717763133219963091?s=19
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:26
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Democrats politics directly hurts people too. You have the top democrat directly assisting in genocide right now. You'll get no guff on that from me, comrade. I can't post the kind of politics I think should actually be happening without violating various terms of service.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:38
|
|
|
If only there was RCV, you wouldn't need to vote for the lesser of two evils. Then they wouldn't be doing genocide, like Austral.... Oh. Um... Nevermind.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:49
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:If only there was RCV, you wouldn't need to vote for the lesser of two evils. Then they wouldn't be doing genocide, like Austral.... Oh. Um... Nevermind. You seem incredibly fixated on this. Did someone tell you that ranked choice voting would solve all of life's problems and clear up your acne, but then you found out that Australia has ranked choice voting and they still do lovely things and also your acne didn't clear up? Something can be a decent idea and also not a panacea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 08:53
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:geographic representation sucks while we're a far cry from 1700s levels of communication and travel being difficult and slow endeavors, the US is still a state covering a massive geographic area of varying terrain and population density filled with people living very different lives depending on their proximity to a major metro. realistically yes, my political needs and concerns are not the same as those of a farmer in nebraska (or, more locally, someone who lives in unincorporated territory outside of kernville), and they are reasonably entitled to representation that understands their local situation. unless ive missed something, we're far from a world where geographic representation is largely extinct in favor of full proportional geographically independent party representation, because geographic representation is still useful that isn't to say that aspects of US federal representation, namely the senate and electoral college, are not absolutely dogshit manifestations of it in dire need of reform or that the overall division of policy between the federal goverment and the states isn't somewhat garbage for the modern era. your regional representation should be able to say "hey we live in the physical parts of the state that governs us what aren't majority population share cities and we deserve services that fit our environment too". they should be less able to say "well in addition to environmental management policies that suit a wilderness or rural area the three people that live here also hate gay people and none live here we swear so they can't get married in cities mfers"
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 12:43
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:
whaaaaa? It would be better if legislatures represented the people's positions on issues, not land RCV still just selects the one person to represent an arbitrary piece of land whose residents have nothing in common other than living there the chuds vote for the chud parties agricultural land barons vote for the agricultural land baron parties good people vote for the parties that want to make the world suck less and the legislature is composed proportionally by the vote there is no "throwing your vote away" or need for RCV because there's no first-past-the-post This is California Politics because California should do this. Let me put it in terms that people who sympathize with reactionary land barons can understand: California has the biggest agriculture economy in the US, but our legislatures represent arbitrary pieces of land, so California's federal legislators are city people, and ag policy is set by the Nebraska Ogallala Aquifer Depleters Qtotonibudinibudet posted:my political needs and concerns are not the same as those of a farmer in nebraska (or, more locally, someone who lives in unincorporated territory outside of kernville), The way rural land barons exploit their land absolutely the huge majority of people who are city dwellers, and they deserve to regulate the behavior of people who own most of the land.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 16:03
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Democrats politics directly hurts people too. You have the top democrat directly assisting in genocide right now. yes, both sides
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 16:19
|
|
|
DeadlyMuffin posted:You seem incredibly fixated on this. They've lived in Australia for years but still haunt the CA politics thread like a tedious specter.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 17:11
|
|
|
Greg12 posted:
The Ogallala Aquifer is doing quite well in Nebraska actually, especially as compared to California's situation: https://www.climate.gov/news-features/featured-images/national-climate-assessment-great-plains%E2%80%99-ogallala-aquifer-drying-out https://www.americangeosciences.org/critical-issues/maps/interactive-map-groundwater-levels-and-subsidence-california Relatedly, Nebraska established its current groundwater regulation framework, the Natural Resource Districts, in 1972, and that was a reorganization of a previous system. California didn't have laws on the books about groundwater use until 2014. For all the problems in the federal system of government, California's groundwater problems are mostly self-inflicted.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 17:34
|
|
|
RCV is too complicated. approval voting (ie mark however many candidates you like, giving one vote to each) leads to fewer spoiled ballots. it does not lead to socialism though so ehn.
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 19:28
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:it does not lead to socialism though so ehn. Spot on, but what does?
|
|
#
?
Jan 18, 2024 22:38
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:I always find myself lost for words when I encounter these people, because all of this seems so obvious to me, and I'm not sure if they're already lost or if there is something I can say that will persuade them. A lot of what they say feels like talking points as well, like somebody told them this poo poo and then they're just repeating it. Can I have a meaningful argument, and what can I say that could change their mind? Typically not. You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into. And for many folks, they see LGBT people as icky, and that's an emotional reaction, not a considered one. Everything else follows from that emotion and is a backwards justification. The only real way to fix that is to get them to meet good people who are LGBT, and get them to generalize it to all LGBT folks, not just the "good ones" that they personally know. You see that occasionally with supportive parents who have a child that comes out as LGBT. Granted, you also see parents disowning their children.
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:17
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:RCV is too complicated. approval voting (ie mark however many candidates you like, giving one vote to each) leads to fewer spoiled ballots. Yeah, checkbox voting is the best. Can't gently caress it up to get votes thrown out like RCV, is very easy to understand, and doesn't inherently support a two party system. Literally everything else in our state and country do, though. Bald Stalin posted:Spot on, but what does? REDACTED
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 00:27
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Spot on, but what does? The only reasonable answer to this is "I don't know, and don't trust anyone who says they know".
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:26
|
|
|
Bald Stalin posted:Spot on, but what does? Hive mind for god Emperor
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 02:35
|
|
|
Doc Hawkins posted:RCV is too complicated. approval voting (ie mark however many candidates you like, giving one vote to each) leads to fewer spoiled ballots. in a vacuum maybe but we've done RCV and have actual experience and data. in practice even first-time RCV voters don't find it confusing, do rank multiple candidates, and have low rates of spoiled ballots (comparable with basic-rear end single vote ballots) https://fairvote.org/resources/data-on-rcv/#voter-support-and-understanding https://fairvote.org/resources/data-on-rcv/#rcv-ballot-use
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 05:22
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:The only reasonable answer to this is "I don't know, and don't trust anyone who says they know". Read more theory
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 06:11
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Read more theory Yeah it's kind of not actually that much of a mystery
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 07:23
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:The only reasonable answer to this is "I don't know, and don't trust anyone who says they know". username post combo
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 07:38
|
|
|
SlimGoodbody posted:Yeah it's kind of not actually that much of a mystery Don't talk about it, that's going a little bit too far
|
|
#
?
Jan 19, 2024 08:24
|
|
|
Cup Runneth Over posted:Read more theory Which one, Marx, Bakunin, Kropotkin, or Bookchin? Even if we're going with Marx there's a million orgs that say they represent Marx besides the DS of A. Do you seize the means of production violently or by democratic means? How exactly is the dictatorship of the proletariat structured? You read Lenin, he tells you that revolution will be different in every place. Mao tells you not to worship books. Don't just repeat each other like lemmings. E: reading Marx is kind of useless IMO, teach people how to start a union or a cooperative. When people can see results in their actual lives they won't need theory. America Inc. fucked around with this message at 07:25 on Jan 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 07:08
|
|
|
i read the one man that accomplished communism: Leonid Brezhnev
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 07:14
|
|
|
if you spend more time reading theory than taking local action your priorities are kinda hosed imo
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 07:41
|
|
|
America Inc. posted:Which one, Marx, Bakunin, Kropotkin, or Bookchin? Even if we're going with Marx there's a million orgs that say they represent Marx besides the DS of A. Do you seize the means of production violently or by democratic means? How exactly is the dictatorship of the proletariat structured? did you spend the last week furiously reading theory so you could write this response to my post e: also lol at suggesting the DSA is Marxist from the DSA website: quote:The collapse of communism in 1989 proved less of an immediate boon to democratic socialists than many of us had hoped. Those who had suffered in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union did not embrace socialism with a human face, but rushed headlong into the embrace of a mythic, free market capitalism. And the failures of capitalist reforms did not revitalize the Left so much as increase support for xenophobic nationalism. this is pretty much the only mention of communism on the entire website Cup Runneth Over fucked around with this message at 08:16 on Jan 25, 2024 |
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 08:06
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 16, 2024 22:56 |
|
|
They're trolling/doing a bit. Now gimme that probe, cunts. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 25, 2024 08:36
|
|