First past the post can be more liberal than pr

First past the post is not democratic but perhaps that might not be a bad thing. Fptp provides a type of ruling elite whereby there is an establishment but also there is a degree of movement provided by elections. If we have full democracy (proportional representation) then it is possible for all the stupid ideas held by people to be represented in parliament. Fptp ensures that government is controlled only by a self-selecting group. Whilst this has obvious disadvantages (it is helpful to the rich) it also protects the government (and by extension the law) from populism. If we accept that eventually (all) stupid ideas will be rejected then we are left with the truth (in time) which is how we should be governed. (Ideally we should not be governed.) The problem with democracy is that the electorate can be bigoted and superstitious which can lead to despotism and tyranny. It is sometimes good to force an unpopular liberalism on the people. Since we can't force people to accept a bad idea... we can only challenge wrong ideas then arguing will eventually lead to a kind of agreed nihilism. Ignorance is temporary. Since ignorance is temporary and it is unlikely that the ruling elite will be more bigoted and ignorant than the general population then (until everyone gets enlightened) it is better to have a liberal establishment controlling the country... which is what fptp provides. First past the post can be useful in protecting the people from the stupidity of themselves... it guarantees that the people will not be in control of the government (there will not be true democracy) which is good until the people are enlightened... since the ruling elite will always be more liberal than the people at large. Fptp can be helpful in protecting the people from their prejudices.