In response to a request by one commenter (Pissedoffsmoker) on this post who asked for a piece on the various voting systems, I did write on this subject here on 23rd May last year. Surprise, surprise, none of the links now work, mainly due I suspect to the Electoral Reform Society (ERS) changing their opinion on AV.
Anyway, here is the link to the ERS website with explanations of how all the known systems for election work. Alternatively, for a more balanced view of the various methods I can but direct those interested to this website, the British Academy - The UK's National Academy for the Humanities and Social Sciences, whose page on "Choosing an electoral system" and the section "In brief" which is most informative - and there is a pdf for those wishing to read the full findings.
To return to the request of Pissedoffsmoker and, specifically, the difference twixt FPTP/AV/PR, I can only, again, refer him to the British Academy website above. However, I would make the following comments:
Much is made of the fact that AV - or any voting system come to that - puts the voter in charge. Nothing is further from the truth when (a) political parties control who are to be their candidates; (b) politicians control who has the 'final say' on any re-call system; (c) politicians say one thing in opposition and practise exactly the opposite once in office; (d) politicians have no morals, principle or honour; (e) politicians do not accept that they are supposed to be the voice of the people and act according to their constituent's wishes; (f) politicians retain control through central government "largesse"; (g) there exists a "democratic deficit" as exhibited by the previous points; and (h) need I continue...........?
Once again, I can but return to that quote from the film "V for Vendetta" in which it is said that there is much wrong with our country, isn't there? So, just how far does the subjugation of the people have to progress before they do, in fact, decide to do something?
10 comments:
"V for Vendetta"
That's on BBC2 now, as I write this
Don't know who this is, but by heavens are they quick off the mark!
Preferential voting or two-party preferred or AV, as it is known over here, always tends to a two party situation.
One of the major obstacles to actual democracy is the mindset of the people, as you know. The undemocratic above then give them what they want.
I've probably said it before, but I am still unable to understand how the LibDems can support AV whilst at the same time being totally opposed to coalition government. They have suddenly discovered that, surprise, surprise, that a coalition has to compromise in order to reach decisions.
In that I have been unable to identify any country which has PR and which does not have a coalition government, I suspect that this is typical LibDem thinking, short term objectives without any thought of the longer term future.
Personally, I don't want a perpetual coalition government and will vote against AV.
Like para.5, sums it up beautifully. Until we can control, frighten, our MPs we will continue to have problems, there can be no doubt about that.
Thanks for the info WFW, you are very kind sir.
Elected Mayors are chosen by AV. Why ?
JH: Agreed!
EP: Why indeed! Typical politicos - they never think any thing through! I shall just not vote - can be arsed!
db1: Very true and the bastards need to be reduced to quaking in their boots!
TT: Why indeed? You tell me!
pos: My pleasure - leave you to make your own mind up on which system you prefer. But while politicos control who are put forward as their candidates and control what system is on offer, it is nowt but a sham!
Don't know who this is, but by heavens are they quick off the mark!
Ach well I read your posts in the wrong order whilst watching the film. By the time I posted my comment...well...it was too late. Besides as per a previous conversation I thought you were unlikely to know the schedule on BBC2. :-)
Post a Comment