Trump vs Trudeau: FPTP is an existential danger to a democracy

[myata]

Through extreme and unbounded polarization plus shifting the focus from specific issues important to the citizens to gaining power (and getting to the trough) at all and any cost.

Quoting a well-known member here "the only valid cause for a party is to be in power". Not to design, propose and implement solutions to the country's problems. That was an old mistake.

Nominating Trump would be no less than self-annihilation of the Republican party and a critical danger to the venerable and celebrated U.S. democracy. When one of the default pillars in the building including a large part of its citizen foundation loses sanity and responsibility, there can be no easy going back.

A similar erosion, though from a different mechanism can be observed in Canada: a default party is losing is democratic meaning almost entirely through the culture of entitlement, near absolute absence of accountability and the leadership cult.

In what is considered modern democratic world, there are only three current instances of FPTP systems. One is unique throughout the history and two are in a serious trouble as a direct consequence of FPTP, and isolation of the political system from the citizens that it inevitably causes.

Who has eyes, see and hear: FPTP is an existential threat to a functional modern democracy.

[Michael Hardner]

How the representatives vote in the legislature is only a part of the picture IMO.  How the PEOPLE engage with GOVERNMENT and the PUBLIC SPHERE is the real problem.

Reconfiguring the chairs in the halls of parliament is a distraction.

We need to align the workings of government with the ability of a public to monitor and give meaningful feedback.

[myata]

20 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

How the representatives vote in the legislature is only a part of the picture IMO.  How the PEOPLE engage with GOVERNMENT and the PUBLIC SPHERE is the real problem.

FPTP, especially in its Canadian version needs no such engagement, like zilch, nada, none at all. If only in the form of merry beaver dances like annual sleigh rides for the peas.. apologies, "constituents". Not even a shame - a joke, parody on the real democracy but what, yes we can.

Some people who still think probably observed that problem in the ancestral democracy that many like to trace proud roots to (that is patently false, by the way) and enabled recall of MPs by the citizens. No, we have a perfectly independent democracy now, won't need that here.

[CdnFox]

27 minutes ago, Michael Hardner said:

How the representatives vote in the legislature is only a part of the picture IMO.  How the PEOPLE engage with GOVERNMENT and the PUBLIC SPHERE is the real problem.

Truer words were never spoke.

The problem with democracy isn't the flavour of democracy you choose, it's the people failing to do their jobs properly.

[CdnFox]

Just now, myata said:

FPTP, especially in its Canadian version needs no such engagement, like zilch, nada, none at all.

It absolutely does, and would be NO different under any other system.

Have you ever actually worked on a campaign  before?  Volunteers, donations, boots on the ground etc is what tends to win them especially in battlefield riding's which are at least a third of canadian ridings.

and elections are arguably the LEAST important part of the job for voters. You're complaining about it but how many policy conventions have you been to for any party?  How many policy committees have you served on or met with in your riding?  how many volunteer hours have you put in for a candidate you like?

i'm going to bet not many, if any.  Yet - you think that somehow changing the system will suddenly make you and others 'engage'?

FPTP is the best system possible for MANY reasons. Hardly perfect and there's definitely changes that would make it better but anything else turns the whole system into an irredeemable gong show with no chance of improvement.

[blackbird]

3 hours ago, myata said:

FPTP is an existential threat to a functional modern democracy.

Changing the voting system to some other system will create a host of other problems and is not a solution.  Lots of people think a so-called proportional voting system will solve the problem, but it won't.  What it will do is take electoral rights away from many people and give those rights to political parties who will select candidates in certain ridings.   The winners will not even be from those ridings.  You end up with far more minority governments, governments that get defeated and elections more frequently costing taxpayers a fortune because there would be far more members of parliament chosen by small fringe parties.

The problem with the system is it is not a real democracy.  The system is highly controlled by the media and they basically are able to decide winners and losers to a large degree.  It is therefore a mediacracy.  We are controlled by the media.  They determine who gets what kind of publicity and support.  The winning government in turn rewards them with grants and various benefits such as the new law that will force internet companies to pay small media producers lots of money.  There are also laws that artificially favour Canadian artists and producers.  This also is a form of payback for supporting the winning party.

[CdnFox]

1 minute ago, blackbird said:

The problem with the system is it is not a real democracy.  The system is highly controlled by the media and they basically are able to decide winners and losers to a large degree.  It is therefore a mediacracy. 

what youv'e said is mostly true.  A few points tho,

The last thing we want is a real democracy.  Democracy is two wolves and a sheep voting on what's for dinner.

Second - gov't is ALWAYS downstream of media.   It doesn't matter if the 'news' is the church, or online media, or brownshirts huddled in secret meetings, or guys giving speeches, etc etc etc.   Through out history gov'ts rise and fall based on public perception.  The current media is just the latest flavour.

Like the man himself said - "If you don't read the paper you're uninformed. If you DO read the paper you're misinformed."

"The media" is a problem no matter what model of gov't you have.  Thats why it's the first thing authoritarians try to control.

[Michael Hardner]

2 hours ago, myata said:

FPTP, especially in its Canadian version needs no such engagement, like zilch, nada, none at all. If only in the form of merry beaver dances like annual sleigh rides for the peas.. apologies, "constituents". Not even a shame - a joke, parody on the real democracy but what, yes we can.

Some people who still think probably observed that problem in the ancestral democracy that many like to trace proud roots to (that is patently false, by the way) and enabled recall of MPs by the citizens. No, we have a perfectly independent democracy now, won't need that here.

Some elements of PR are actually worse for connecting with the people though.  If you have MPs that are not assigned to geographic ridings then ... good luck with that.

Real democracy means real participation and that means responsibility for the people too.  Like I said, moving the chairs around won't turn around our culture of sitting and waiting for government to tell us what to do.

[myata]

1 hour ago, Michael Hardner said:

If you have MPs that are not assigned to geographic ridings then ... good luck with that.

Yes you can have a local representative can even vote for the one you like people figured it out ages ago why does it need to be repeated again and again, but one thing is certain: if you are averse to any change, h-te it and fight tooth and nail to avoid it at any cost you're going to be stuck in the past. Assured and destined to, by choice too. The dinosaur in the world of Internet. That much is assured.

[myata]

4 hours ago, CdnFox said:

FPTP is the best system possible for MANY reasons.

The reality: two of the three remaining in the modern democratic world are in a deep, possibly existential trouble. "Best system", right. What more do you need to illustrate our condition here?

The reality: two megapolitical corporations run by Central committees cannot effectively manage a modern complex society. Yes kings and their camarillias used to govern countries but it was centuries back. Nobody noticed, no?

Edited July 18, 2023 by myata

[Michael Hardner]

14 minutes ago, myata said:

Yes you can have a local representative can even vote for the one you like people figured it out ages ago why does it need to be repeated again and again, but one thing is certain: if you are averse to any change, h-te it and fight tooth and nail to avoid it at any cost you're going to be stuck in the past. Assured and destined to, by choice too. The dinosaur in the world of Internet. That much is assured.

Agreed. 

I think I would like to take a long view of change.

#1 - A healthy democracy is based on healthy public, which we don't have
#2 - Make people realize that we don't have that
#3 - Create a space for true public discussion
#4 - Promote that

Edited July 18, 2023 by Michael Hardner

[myata]

A valiant effort Michael

[myata]

Canada political system: perfect from beginning, change is anathema!