Tuesday 1 October 2013

First past the post is offensive

The nature of property rights is that they are antagonistic. Where there is a property dispute there will be opposing sides who each claim to own a piece of property. If people agree on the correct ownership of property there is no dispute of course. If the role of government is at least in part concerned with arranging the internal property of a country (and not only concerned with external affairs) then we see why proportional representation is favourable. Without proportional representation (pr) elections will tend to devolve into a two-party system which doesn't allow people to truly express their view on internal property. If both of the main parties are incorrect in their assessment of particular property claims then there will be no form of redress available to the voter. If there is proportional representation then property claims of many different types can be reflected in parliament.

Crime is invisible if it is not recognised by at least one of the two main parties in a fptp system. Democracy is a tool against crime and if we have the fullest expression of democracy then we will have the least amount of crime. People do not like crime but if there is insufficient democracy available to the people then the government will often fail to apprehend the criminals and they will go free. Democracy enables the people to reject crime but if there is not enough democracy this mechanism is oppressed.

People like freedom because it is the opposite of crime so then if we oppress democracy we oppress freedom.

No comments:

Post a Comment