The government assumes authority by default

It would make sense to choose a voting system which encourages the electorate to think. If thinking is rewarded (as it is in most systems) then people will get a better government and live happier lives... but with certain systems (fptp) thoughtfulness is not always rewarded. In fact it might even be true to say that with fptp thinking is actively discouraged because being radical and departing from the two main parties diminishes the value of the vote. First past the post tends to 'punish' people who think differently from the mainstream which is not a good feature of a voting system. If we are not rewarded for thinking then the choice will devolve into choosing from between the two (bad) options provided by the government. If government has control (as with fptp) then voters will be asked which of the two versions of statism they prefer (dislike the least) in contrast to being asked to choose a representative. If there is less choice there will be more state because the government will occupy those areas of influence not controlled by the voter. In a democracy government is the default position where the voter has not rejected it so with less choice comes more government. There will be more government in a democracy if there is less choice... as with fptp. Fptp leads to more government than pr because if people have less choice the choices will narrow to two versions of statism. If there is less choice the government will grow to fill the gaps. Where people do not reject the government (in a democracy) it is assumed that the government is able to occupy the gaps (economically) and so the government will grow. If we do not reject the government we get government. Government assumes authority everywhere that it has not been removed by democracy. So if there is less democracy there will be more government.