If it is not possible for there to be more than one winner in an election then tactical voting will be rewarded because votes given to the smaller parties will not count. It is only if the votes cast for the less-popular candidates are recognised that people will have no incentive to vote tactically. Tactical voting arises from a winner-takes-all system.
If we assume that the default system of government is (economic) liberalism then the two-party fptp system will result in a duopoly between one party that favours a small state and a socialist party. But for a liberal voter to exclude the socialists requires them to vote for a monopolistic liberal party (since that party doesn't support pr). The liberals in a two-party system are oppressing liberal voters by apparently forcing them to vote for only their party. Fptp doesn't give liberals a choice to vote for anyone but the Tory party if they want to keep Labour out. And since many liberals will not accept this (false) offer of the Tories or a wasted vote they will let the Tories fail even if it means suffering a Labour (Democratic in the United States) government. Fptp is helpful to the Labour party and it is supported by the Tory party (or there would likely be pr) so then the Tory party are supporting the Labour party in the most significant aspect of government.
Tory support for fptp means that they are similar to the Labour party.
If the Tories are not on the same side as the Labour party the obvious course of action for them to take would be to oppose fptp and to advocate for the introduction of pr. If the Tories do not support pr they are supporting the Labour party.
The Tories are the same as Labour if they support fptp.
No comments:
Post a Comment