|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 30, 2022 11:50:12 GMT
I think the weaknesses of pr make it far more dangerous than FPTP ...and yet the evidence of the uk and its "stable" fptp system against the so called "weaker" pr of many european countires doesnt quite stack up as i said earlier with regard to the netherlands and its stable pr democracy , with one pm since 2010 , and the uk with 6 pms in 6 years.
Change is a terrible thing to some people , yet wether we like it or not , change happens.
Comparing only the last 6 years and to only one other country seems to be cherry picking, and comes across as rather cynical. Changing the UKs system of government needs a somewhat more considered analysis. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2022 11:50:29 GMT
...and yet the evidence of the uk and its "stable" fptp system against the so called "weaker" pr of many european countires doesnt quite stack up as i said earlier with regard to the netherlands and its stable pr democracy , with one pm since And yet?? You appear to be ignoring my posts and running a script. I didn't say that pr can't produce some stability with a stable population. The government will be a patchwork quilt, pieced together in an accountable manner from various parties, all of whom are unaccountable for the result. If you like that kind of thing, i guess that might be dream come true. To me it sounds eminently hijackable and very dangerous. You mention the Netherlands - aren't they the government, when faced with potential future European food shortages, decided to close down a large fraction of Holland's agricultural sector? Change is a terrible thing to some people , yet wether we like it or not , change happens.
What a tedious and long winded slogan |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 11:51:45 GMT
...and yet the evidence of the uk and its "stable" fptp system against the so called "weaker" pr of many european countires doesnt quite stack up as i said earlier with regard to the netherlands and its stable pr democracy , with one pm since 2010 , and the uk with 6 pms in 6 years.
Change is a terrible thing to some people , yet wether we like it or not , change happens.
Comparing only the last 6 years and to only one other country seems to be cherry picking, and comes across as rather cynical. Changing the UKs system of government needs a somewhat more considered analysis. ok. What would you suggest ? |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 11:57:20 GMT
...and yet the evidence of the uk and its "stable" fptp system against the so called "weaker" pr of many european countires doesnt quite stack up as i said earlier with regard to the netherlands and its stable pr democracy , with one pm since And yet?? You appear to be ignoring my posts and running a script. I didn't say that pr can't produce some stability with a stable population. The government will be a patchwork quilt, pieced together in an accountable manner from various parties, all of whom are unaccountable for the result. If you like that kind of thing, i guess that might be dream come true. To me it sounds eminently hijackable and very dangerous Change is a terrible thing to some people , yet wether we like it or not , change happens.
What a tedious and long winded slogan Sorry if you feel that way , but im not ignoring your posts , im having trouble coming to terms with your heavily loaded words when describing pr , yet you provide absolutely zero evidence for maintaining the status quo in westminster voting.
In my opinon , your views dont stack up , seem to be nothing more than continuing for tradition sake and no more , and you seem to be in a minority in your views on PR...
Long running survey finds majority support proportional representation
Now, for the first time, over half of people (51%) want the electoral system changed, while only 44% want to retain the current system.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 12:12:12 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2022 12:16:11 GMT
im having trouble coming to terms with your heavily loaded words when describing pr , yet you provide absolutely zero evidence for maintaining the status quo in westminster voting. You are the one continuously using loaded language - all stable systems have a 'status quo'. Just as all working systems are run by a minority. The advantage of FPTP is that it engages honestly with that reality and provides a mechanism by which that minority itself can realistically be hired and sacked. With FPTP, the price for being singularly in control is that you are also singularly to blame and so unambiguous performance information is transmitted back to the electorate PR obfuscates this reality and so obfuscates the accountability |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 30, 2022 12:39:36 GMT
Comparing only the last 6 years and to only one other country seems to be cherry picking, and comes across as rather cynical. Changing the UKs system of government needs a somewhat more considered analysis. ok. What would you suggest ? That you come up with a more compelling case |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 12:42:32 GMT
im having trouble coming to terms with your heavily loaded words when describing pr , yet you provide absolutely zero evidence for maintaining the status quo in westminster voting. You are the one continuously using loaded language - all stable systems have a 'status quo'. Just as all working systems are run by a minority. The advantage of FPTP is that it engages honestly with that reality and provides a mechanism by which that minority itself can realistically be hired and sacked. With FPTP, the price for being singularly in control is that you are also singularly to blame and so unambiguous performance information is transmitted back to the electorate PR obfuscates this reality and so obfuscates the accountability in what way am i using loaded language comparable to your description of pr as very dangerous and hijackable?
yet the majority prefer to ditch fptp in favour of PR?
The reality of safe bench warming seats , and government of the majority decided by a minority in a few marginals obfuscates democratic accountability.
As i said perhaps you could give me some counter examples of the dangers of pr in terms of what countries are struggling in the way you describe?
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 12:43:05 GMT
ok. What would you suggest ? That you come up with a more compelling case i have provided a number of links and arguments. What about you? |
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 30, 2022 13:01:39 GMT
That you come up with a more compelling case i have provided a number of links and arguments. What about you? Why would I, I'm not the one proposing that anything be changed. If you want to change something, surely it is incumbent on you to explain what you want to change to, and help me (and others) to understand why it would produce more desirable outcomes in order to secure my (and others) buy in. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Oct 30, 2022 13:48:40 GMT
in what way am i using loaded language comparable to your description of pr as very dangerous and hijackable? I gave you an example - there are multiple others. As you made an issue out it, I thought i might do the same back. The reality of safe bench warming seats , and government of the majority decided by a minority in a few marginals obfuscates democratic accountability. No it doesn't - the governing party is in control and can be sensibly and consequentially criticised for the exercise of that control, therefore making them accountable. Don't mix up 'representing all views' with being accountable. As I've suggested, this "representing all views' notion is a mirage anyway because a working system will be run by a tiny minority who will have to ignore most available views to do anything at all. The issue is can you realistically sack this minority and hire another As i said perhaps you could give me some counter examples of the dangers of pr in terms of what countries are struggling in the way you describe? I gave the example of the Netherlands, the government of which seems to deliberately closing a large fraction of their agricultural sector. Pr is superb at holding unwanted, crackpot policy in place. |
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 16:00:45 GMT
i have provided a number of links and arguments. What about you? Why would I, I'm not the one proposing that anything be changed. If you want to change something, surely it is incumbent on you to explain what you want to change to, and help me (and others) to understand why it would produce more desirable outcomes in order to secure my (and others) buy in. Neither am i. Scotland ireland( north and south) wales and many other european nations already successfully operate Forms of pr and have done for decades. The de facto English parliament seems to be the anomaly with its FPTP system.
What im suggesting is a majority of people in your country ( link provided) want pr instead of fptp , and for the purpose of debate on an interwebby forum , im simply asking questions.
|
|
|
|
Post by thomas on Oct 30, 2022 16:05:06 GMT
in what way am i using loaded language comparable to your description of pr as very dangerous and hijackable? I gave you an example - there are multiple others. As you made an issue out it, I thought i might do the same back. The reality of safe bench warming seats , and government of the majority decided by a minority in a few marginals obfuscates democratic accountability. No it doesn't - the governing party is in control and can be sensibly and consequentially criticised for the exercise of that control, therefore making them accountable. Don't mix up 'representing all views' with being accountable. As I've suggested, this "representing all views' notion is a mirage anyway because a working system will be run by a tiny minority who will have to ignore most available views to do anything at all. The issue is can you realistically sack this minority and hire another As i said perhaps you could give me some counter examples of the dangers of pr in terms of what countries are struggling in the way you describe? I gave the example of the Netherlands, the government of which seems to deliberately closing a large fraction of their agricultural sector. Pr is superb at holding unwanted, crackpot policy in place. The netherlands and it pr system is ranked in the top three politically stable countries in the world according to this article. So im not sure which example you gave , but from what im reading its simply your own personal opinion rather than any substantive evidence which so far you have failed to provide.
10 Most Politically Stable Countries, Ranked by Perception
The Netherlands, ranking No. 3 for its perceived political stability, also ranked highly for gender equality and religious freedom. Led by Prime Minister Mark Rutte, the country ranks No. 10 overall in the Best Countries rankings.
|
|
|
|
Post by colbops on Oct 30, 2022 16:40:39 GMT
Why would I, I'm not the one proposing that anything be changed. If you want to change something, surely it is incumbent on you to explain what you want to change to, and help me (and others) to understand why it would produce more desirable outcomes in order to secure my (and others) buy in. Neither am i.
Fair enough. I thought you were suggesting that the UK reform its electoral system. If you're not, cool, nothing to discuss then. |
|
|
|
Post by Cartertonian on Oct 30, 2022 19:25:34 GMT
Colbops wrote: Our politics has become significantly destabilised as a result of a change that was endorsed by the electorate just over six years ago. No-one made any sort of serious attempt to explain why it would produce more desirable outcomes. They relied on appeals to emotion and nationalism to effect change, with no clear...or even cloudy...vision of how it would be better. People therefore voted on blind faith. At least with PR, people can look around Europe and the wider world and see examples of how it can work. We had no such opportunity in June 2016.  |
|
