Scientists are finally starting to figure it out: there is no way to make democracy work.
Read more Divided Democrats: Not Just Israel — NATO and China Too
That is why the Founding Fathers of America didn’t even try to make a democracy but rather a representative republic with serious checks and balances on both the government itself and the power of the people to manipulate said government.
From an article in Tech Science Daily:
“Denmark’s 2022 national election came down to a single seat, even though its proportional voting system was designed to make party representation closely match the vote. That outcome points to a deeper mathematical problem: no electoral system can always preserve local winners, guarantee proportional national results, and keep parliament at a fixed size.
Researchers from the University of Cambridge and the University of Copenhagen reached that conclusion after analyzing proportional and first-past-the-post systems. Their work shows that every method of electing a national legislature requires compromises, most often among regional representation, proportionality, and the number of parliamentary seats.”
Well duh. It mirrors life, and it is impossible to create a truly just and equitable system in life. The will-o-the-wisp that liberals have pursued for over a hundred years now is a truly fair and equal society, and it is just not mathematically possible.
The best we can do is make rules and stick to them.
Of course, politics is now about so much money, and so much power over people’s lives, that the parties — particularly those on the Left, where they are not constrained by a moral or religious code — will do anything to win, and if that means subverting the rules set in place, so be it. They see them as suggestions made by tired old white men anyway.
With so many trying to subvert the rules, is it any wonder politics is such dirty business?
The article continues:
“Like many European democracies, Denmark uses a two-tier proportional system. Voters first choose local representatives, after which ‘leveling’ seats are distributed to bring each party’s share of parliament closer to its national vote share.
That mechanism becomes harder to maintain as more political parties compete. Greater fragmentation requires a larger number of ‘leveling’ seats to preserve proportionality, and the 40 available in Denmark’s 2022 election were no longer sufficient.
Read more Wondering about Trump and Iran and Everything
“Essentially, it almost broke the system,” said study co-author Dr Frederik Ravn Klausen, from Cambridge’s Department of Pure Mathematics and Mathematical Statistics. “The end result was that the Social Democrats got one seat more than their votes corresponded to. Of course that is nothing by UK standards, but in a two-tier system, that isn’t meant to happen. It increased the drama that this single seat decided the election.”
Klausen and co-author Sebastian Tim Holdum of the University of Copenhagen used the election as the starting point for an impossibility theorem. Their result explains why growing party fragmentation is placing established voting systems under pressure and changing real democratic outcomes.”
This is the reason why the United States only has two major parties; the parties act as the coalitions, and it is the internal politics that play out prior to the elections that determine how things are going to go. Multiple parties, as in most parliamentary systems, mean more fights, and trying to make it fair with proportional voting (and we see this in some of our states now as well as ranked choice) leads instead to more cheating and less fair outcomes, as minority winners can still wind up in power.
At any rate, this study should be jumped on by conservatives to bash the ranked choice systems implemented by Democrats to give them power even when they are the minority. Not to mention RINO Republicans — Lisa Murkowski is in office solely because of ranked choice. And it should make a powerful argument against abolishing the College of Electors.
The Democrats are still complaining about the Electoral College and how they won the popular vote but lost the election in 2016 and 2000. But that is a result of this very principle, and it is why we have an Electoral College in the first place. Without it, we would have had pure chaos, and the vote fraud would have been far worse (it was bad anyway). The Electoral College votes for the President; the public just gives their opinion on the matter, or that was how it was originally intended. Now, of course, many states bind the electors to vote for whom they are pledged. But that was never the original intent of the framers of the Constitution.
So for all you Democrats who call us “science deniers” because we disagree with what you insist is “settled science” about climate change and wouldn’t take the clot shot, I ask you to defend the system you’ve been demanding in place of the one we have. Science shows you are wrong. Are you man enough to admit that the science proves you wrong?
Didn’t think so.
But then you mighty Philosophers and Men of Science can’t even define what a man is anyway.
Read more Freedom Dies When Legitimate Dissent Is Branded ‘Anti-Tech Extremism’
Read more from Tim at The Aviary www.tbirdnow.mee.nu
Image: RawPixel.com