colddiesel
Literotica Guru
- Joined
- Aug 22, 2006
- Posts
- 5,486
Peck smith. Provide one example of PR working otherwise put a sock in it! 
Proportional representation
- Thread starter pecksniff
- Start date
Peck smith. Provide one example of PR working otherwise put a sock in it!
New Zealand has it since 1996. No problems with it.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
Another lie.
From Wiki:
The introduction of MMP has led to mostly minority or coalition governments, but the first party to win an outright majority since the introduction of MMP was the Labour Party, led by Jacinda Ardern, in 2020.
That does not constitute a problem.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
Not to you. It does for anyone who wants to govern. You are a dinkum idiot!
Well, I haven't heard of NZ suffering any problems through instability in Parliament.
Peck smith. Provide one example of PR working otherwise put a sock in it!
I believe some form of PR is used by every country in Europe except for the UK. (Well, and the Vatican.)
Does anybody see any other solution?
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
You wouldn't because you believe PR solves everything. For decades NZ has had feeble and unstable governments that could collapse at any time. Passing any controversial legislation had been almost impossible but you don't care. PR solves all the world's ills. Hah!
Was it any better before 1996?
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
Yes. Alternating major parties who could pass legislation easily. (including the stupidity of going for MMR). If they had been elected under MMR they couldn't have passed that...
Does this apply to every country in continental Europe? Are they all unstable because of PR?
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
Many are. Belgium and Sweden are the worst, Germany post-Angela Merkel has a coalition (as she did) but the members of her coalition trusted her. They're not sure about her successor.
Germany and Italy are federal states (like the US) not unitary states such as France. There is the conflict between the states and the central government which isn't helped because PR often means differing small parties are elected in the states but aren't large enough at the Federal level. Imagine if Texas elected only Texanophiles? What would Congress and the Senate make of people who would only consider Texan interests and vote against everything else? It happens in Europe.
Language and history also make PR difficult. In Belgium, there is an almost equal split between French speakers and Dutch speakers and they don't trust each other. Any coalition government has to include both but if it does it has little possibility of lasting with the hatred between the two groups. PR doesn't solve that, but to be fair, any system in Belgium would fail.
In France, you have the Bretons and Catalans (and sometimes Alsatians) who don't speak French and don't see themselves as French. In Spain (and parts of France, you have the basques. In Italy, there are the German speakers of the South Tirol (or Alto Adige in Italian) who are largely self-governing.
Also in Italy, the Northern (industrialised) Italians look down on the Southern Italians whom they see as lazy sons of bitches who are riddled with the Mafia..) That doesn't look well for a federal government elected by PR with multiple regional parties.
Edited to add: But why do I bother? You obviously know NOTHING about PR in operation.
Edited again for PPS: As the result of a recent French Regional (Department approx state in US terms), a coalition of convenience has been made between the Right-wing party and the Communists. How would that go down with US Republicans? Similar coalitions have taken place in Italy in the past between the right-wing Catholic Party and the communists. In the North of France, the mayor of the City of Calais is Communist but the Department Mayor is Right-wing. How would that work in the US?
Last edited:
Actually, that's pretty much how it is now.
Early in the 20th Century, some American cities experimented with PR. There was a successful backlash against it because it allowed Communists to be elected, but mainly because it allowed African-Americans to be elected.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
You have just destroyed your own case for PR. America tried it and didn't like the results. Communists are unlikely now but candidates for BLM, Antifa, even Proud Boys? Or Creationist Christians, Southern Baptists?
You would have to completely revise the Electoral College system and could end up with a multitude of elected party nominees many of whom would be completely opposed to others. A recipe for disaster and a constitutional impasse. Give up.
You would have to completely revise the Electoral College system and could end up with a multitude of elected party nominees many of whom would be completely opposed to others. A recipe for disaster and a constitutional impasse. Give up.
I see that as a safety valve. If Timothy McVeigh had been able to look to Congress and see David Duke or somebody like him representing white nationalism, he might not have felt so politically frustrated he had to resort to terrorism.
oggbashan
Dying Truth seeker
- Joined
- Jul 3, 2002
- Posts
- 56,017
That is the most stupid reason for PR that I have ever heard. He should have known there were already White Nationalists in the US legislature. Nothing would have changed him.
You are really scraping the bottom of the barrel now.
This video is a good illustration of the mechanics -- not of proportional representation, but of ranked choice voting/instant-runoff voting.
Similar threads
