Fptp isn't representative democracy

If we are to elect a government we should be sure to have many representatives and not just one. If we elect only one leader then we must vote tactically for one of the candidates which has a reasonable chance of winning. Tactical voting means voting for someone we do not like very much because the person we really like has little chance of winning. So we work out who is popular and pick our favourite of the popular candidates. The objection to tactical voting is not that we dislike people voting against the other established parties... that is what we expect... our complaint is that (to do so) we must vote for a party which we do not like very much. It is the if-you-can't-beat-them-join-them aspect of tactical voting which is offensive not that we vote negatively... all elections whether they are proportional or not are negative. The problem is not that they are tactical it is that they are not tactical enough. Fptp is insufficiently tactical.

If there is only one leader then we cannot vote for our preferred candidate only one who is likely to do well. Not being able to vote for whom we really want is a problem because people want small government where possible. If we allow many leaders we allow democracy and small government. The alternative to pr is not anarchy it is rule by the dominating main parties which are highly socialist in different ways. Pr gives power to the voter and removes it from the dominant parties. Fptp gives the bigger parties an unfair advantage which they exploit with socialism. Fptp gives us more socialism than the voters want. Pr gives no more than the problems of democracy fptp gives the problems of democracy plus the problems of the main parties. Pr destroys the main parties.

We don't need to have only one ruler the principles of anrchy dictate that many people can rule. In a referendum many people can vote but with fptp this is reduced down to just a single person. If referendums are the ultimate form of direct democracy then pr can be seen as a very close approximation to this. With pr we elect a collection of people to act as a proxy for the country as a whole. If there are lots of people voting on something it is unlikely to happen. Democracy is a veto on laws. It is more difficult for a law to pass if many people have a veto... which is why referendums tend to result in a 'no' vote. Fptp exclues the public from the legislative process.

Being able to choose a leader or even a representative is not the same as being able to vote. Pr is not really representative democracy in the way that fptp is... with pr we are represented truly. With fptp we are represented by the least worst of the available (popular) options so we are not represented.