StoneyPicton

joined 4 months ago
[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago* (last edited 3 months ago) (5 children)

You're absolutely right about single issues being absorbed, the most prevalent being gun rights and abortion in the u.s.. I think I lean much more on the side of education and civic engagement you mentioned. Not easy to shove that down anybody's throat. The moment you try to introduce a larger extent of that you'll get the "brainwashing our kids" crowd crying fowl, even though they're right. My solutions to these problems aren't well received or practical given the current state. While I understand your objections and am willing to throw caution to the wind I don't think a change to PR will really be of consequence.

Edit: I came back to this because I realized this sounded too defeatist. Certainly PR or something similar is the next best step. Nothing we do will happen quickly so the most important thing always is to keep moving.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 3 months ago

A list of those beers please. Am happy to chip in! Cheers

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago

Great piece, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (7 children)

I don't suggest that one issue parties would form government. I do suggest however that a one issue party would be part of a coalition and would eventually want their one issue addressed. If a coalition government wanted the votes for an issue they really felt important, they may concede to other issues that they would not otherwise entertain. I know you will say, rightly, that this is what democracy and working with others is all about. My complaint is that it simplifies what governing an entire country entails. I feel it invalidates governance when myopic views are allowed to prevail and striving for one issue can eliminate proper consideration of another for the simple desire to get that one issue passed. I feel this contributes to allowing an ignorant electorate to treat the only thing the care about as a zero sum game where no matter what else is allowed to happen, at least they get their way. I know I overplay this narrative and simplify my concerns but the underlying premise is still valid. To not strive for a more informed electorate and a more broad appreciation of cause and effect does no one any favours.

[–] [email protected] 4 points 3 months ago (9 children)

I've always leaned toward ranked ballots as I felt it would be an improvement over a constant over-representation of the conservative mentality in a majority progressive country. Recently there have been posts on Lemmy where people have made good points for proportional representation (PR) but I still have reservations. I agree with a post here about the fact the party ultimately chooses who to appoint to the earned positions and so also agree that it would need to be adjusted with an open list, details to be worked out. My main objection to the PR system though is the rise of many single issue and or myopic platforms for parties that would get representation. My fear would be a party coalition quagmire where issues that should never see the light of day are entertained in an effort to appease the dubious partners. Would we want a Muslim, Christian or Hindu party pushing a particular agenda? Would we want an NRA backed group pushing gun freedom? I feel I could only support PR if there were guardrails put in place to mitigate this type threat. I've had someone comment that if that's what people choose then shouldn't they have that right? I understand that point but still have reservations. Thanks for prompting this discussion.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago

His thoughts are definitely not mainstream and in this case he's giving too much credit to a healthy diet, but damn if I don't agree with some of the things he says. I'd love to know the truth of his sources. Here's an interview he did before the election.

https://www.nbcnews.com/meet-the-press/video/-we-re-living-in-a-weird-period-of-history-full-rfk-jr-interview-190800453748

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

Great bit, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago

How's that new mandate working out so that tool Ford can deal with trump?

[–] [email protected] 6 points 3 months ago

I hadn't looked closely at that. I'll have a look, thanks.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I agree with your arguments and especially about new governments tearing up what was done under the other. This would still happen but maybe less. Bottom line is I'd vote for either when in mean getting rid of FPTP. Cheers

[–] [email protected] 1 points 3 months ago (1 children)

I agree and am not opposed to PR. I only worry about the fracturing of the electorate.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 3 months ago (8 children)

I much prefer ranked ballots to PR. IMO PR will lead to dozens of niche parties with single issue platforms that will end in coalition hell.

view more: ‹ prev next ›