First past the post is a myth

Fptp gives all the power to the largest party

We need ur (universal representation) because otherwise the largest party will get the entirety of the power which is populist. Without ur the largest party gets all the power which means minorities are ignored. Only the largest party can veto laws and not everybody... fptp reduces the democratic veto to only the largest party.

Universal representation is a better term than pr

Universal representation is a better name to use than 'proportional' representation... the term universal representation immediately suggests we are concerned not with the government but with the people.

Universal in this context means not to exclude anyone but to include all the voters so then we are not concerned with the government and how it is perceived... we are concerned with the people and how they are represented.

First past the post is only good for the tories

It is selfish for the right-wing party alone to reject pr

In a fptp duopoly it is the centre-right (cr) not centre-left (cl) party which is more obnoxious in opposing pr because to do so is inconsistent with their other strongly-held beliefs. We assume the centre-right party prefers small government and the centre-left party is in favour of big government. We are aware that pr reduces the size of government because choice is good and small government is good... and so since the cr party advocates small government it is inconsistent for them to oppose reform unless they value their party above their country. Unless the cr party are selfish they have no reason to oppose pr. The cl party has legitimate reasons to reject pr because they are genuinely opposed to choice and freedom so to be in favour of fptp for them is not selfish in itself only in the broader context. It is selfish for the cr party to reject pr but not the cl party.

Pr is very similar to anarchy and direct democracy

Direct democracy is like organised anarchy with no presidents because people are able to vote directly on laws. Proportional representation (pr) is preferable to fptp because is it more like direct democracy... if there are multiple representatives this means that minorities can find representation and the problem of presidentialism is diminished. Pr is better than fptp because it is more like anarchy and direct democracy. If there are representatives then the greater their number the more like direct democracy the system becomes. To make representative democracy less authoritarian we should have a greater number of representatives in each seat. Tactical voting is evidence that the voting system is not direct. Pr means you can trust your representative to vote as you would vote... with fptp we choose only the party closest to our views.

Democracy is illegitimate if it is not direct

Representative democracy should only be proportional and never fptp because this removes the protections afforded by democracy and leads to big government.