|
The central problem with alternative vote schemes or representation setups it they all rely on a fundamental assumption of democracy: the will of the majority is always correct. This is verifiably false. It doesn't matter if you implement ~the fairest, most majority accurate~ voting system of them all and the candidates best perform to majority expectations in office, if the majority is wrong about a major issue or issues (like climate change, race, economics, foreign relations, etc...), then the government will be wrong and thus immoral. Chuds are extremely wrong. Centrists are slightly less wrong. Leftists are correct. But even in a "more fair" vote scheme, democracy says the average of the two wrong groups should be the ruling philosophy of the government for everyone, as long as they can agree enough on what candidates they like. And especially on something with a hard time limit built in like climate change, we do not have time to pussyfoot around with this "winning hearts and votes" bullshit. If democracy prevents the correct people from running society, especially if not doing so is tantamount to existential suicide, then democracy is fundamentally morally wrong, and needs to be dismantled. My preference? Replace representative democracy in America by an unchecked dictatorship of BIPOC for the next five centuries, minimum. Can't possibly be worse than the same when the WASPs were in that position.
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2020 10:13
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 11, 2024 12:16 |
|
|
I see what the problem is here: the fact voting, for whatever reason, is seen as a right: that no matter how reckless you are with it, no matter how many bad decisions you make that endanger other people's lives with it, you get to keep doing it, no questions asked. We need to reframe voting, the ability to make choices that affect other people, as a privilege, like having the ability to drive. And like driving, your voter card needs a points system: too many infractions, too many bad decisions on your part endangering others with it, you get that privilege revoked. Want it back? Mandatory civics course and public service to remind you of the stakes involved, followed by board review of your case.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2020 18:31
|
|
|
DrSunshine posted:How do you do this without the possibility that this will be used to punish and marginalize minority groups, the disenfranchised, and the disadvantaged? Blanket revoke it from all of the majority oppressors (white people) first: if any "good ones" actually exist, they can earn it back. And if they can't, who gives a poo poo?
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2020 18:55
|
|
|
Main Paineframe posted:In this case, the person who really controls the system is whoever has the authority to control whose voting rights get revoked. During Jim Crow, this exact logic was used by white supremacists to disenfranchise minority voters. Of course it being used by white supremacists to disenfranchise minorities was abhorrent, everyone agrees on that point. But if it's used by the minorities to disenfranchise the white supremacists instead, I don't see any moral issues. I consider the who it was used by and against the problem, not the method itself. You may not call it fair, but it would be just, which is much more important for a healthy society.
|
|
#
¿
Jul 4, 2020 20:28
|
|