• atomkarinca@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 year ago

    it’s baffling to me that voting (or democracy for that matter) for a lot of people means, electing a person every 4-5 years and expecting them to be “good” leaders.

    if the process isn’t directly tied to accountability at all times, how is that democracy? you elect lesser of many evils (in most places you won’t even have more than 2 “eligible” candidates) and that’s it?

    whatever voting system you have, it will not solve this systemic problem.

    • chaogomu@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The systemic issue of “lesser evil” is a direct result of first past the post voting. Ordinal voting methods cause you to have limited choices.

      It’s hard to have a functional democracy, it takes work, it takes a voting method that doesn’t sabotage the process.

      That said, it’s impossible to have a true communist utopia with any other form of government, and especially not an authoritarian rule.

      If some animals are more equal than other animals, then you’ve betrayed the ideal, and everyone will suffer for it.

      • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        The systemic issue of “lesser evil” is a direct result of first past the post voting.

        No, it is not.

        It is a consequence directly of the ideal of representation.

        • chaogomu@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          First past the post voting is at fault here, or rather it’s at the core of a deep systemic problem.

          This video explains it quite well.

          The TLDR is Arrow’s Theorem, that basically says that all ranked voting methods (and particularly first past the post) tend to result in two party dominance over time. This is the “lesser of two evils” effect, because either side doesn’t have to convince their supporters that they’re good, just that their opponent is worse.

          • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            You are not engaging the more general problem, which is not specifically the number of evils, whether two or more, nor the process by which one evil may be selected among many.

            The general evil is the ideal of representation, or according to some, at least representation lacking consistent and absolute accountability to the represented.

            • chaogomu@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              You’re using some sort of weird known only to you verbiage. That’s why I’m not engaging with it.

              The problem is simple, and known. First Past the Post voting has been mathematically shown to cause the rise of a two party political system. Once you have two opposing parties, they don’t have to work for the good of the people anymore, they just have to sling enough mud at the competition.

              • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                1
                ·
                edit-2
                1 year ago

                There is no single problem, and many of the problems are not necessarily simple.

                Many perceive a problem from decisions that affect them being made by elected representatives.

                Others may be more agreeable to elected representatives making decisions, but demand much greater participation by and accountability to the constituency.

                Communists have long been critical of representative government, because it enforces a class disparity of elites over the governed, not broadly different from aristocratic rule.

                • chaogomu@kbin.social
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  1
                  ·
                  1 year ago

                  Yes, yes, we all know that the dream is to live in a fully stateless society.

                  But we also know that a fully stateless society isn’t actually possible, because then who would organize the large infrastructure projects?

                  There’s quite a bit more that government do, but I don’t really care about law enforcement. Most crimes go unpunished as police don’t actually try to solve crimes, just enforce laws on the poor and minorities…

                  International trade and such are a big one.

                  And a military, because that’s how the last two attempts at stateless communism failed.


                  So if you must have a government (and you really must), then it should be the best one possible.

                  Any form of dictatorship is right out. That’s a flat betrayal of the communist dream, and places the people into a new form of feudalism. It stops being the dream of communism and starts becoming the nightmare of Leninism, or worse, Stalinism.

                  Direct democracy is the dream, but you quickly run into an issue of scale. You would need dedicated communication channels to constantly broadcast information about proposed laws and regulations, and the entire population would need to spend a good portion of their time reading and researching, and not you know, working on their own shit.

                  This leads to a representative democracy. You pick people whose full job is to read and research that shit. They then have aids and staff who further read and research.

                  Now, there are several problems that can crop up with representative democracy, but if you look back at the posts above, the specific one I referenced, the “Lesser of two evils” has one cause. First Past the Post voting.

                  Arrow’s Theorem is a major problem for representative democracy, but it’s not a problem without a solution. You simply ditch FPtP in favor of a cardinal voting system like STAR.

                  That’s the first step. The next is Apportionment. The US has one of the least representative democracies around due to a law passed in 1929 called the Reapportionment Act of 1929. It capped the size of the House at 435 members, despite the population tripling since then and adding two extra states, that number stands.

                  After the apportionment is fixed, there need to be term limits. I’m in favor of consecutive term limits. As in, you’re not limited to the total number of terms, but to the number of terms in a row.

                  After that, well, there are a few nitpicks, but most things would sort themselves out with those three fixes.

                  • unfreeradical@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    1 year ago

                    Terse judgments about impossibility are not generally meaningful, and the particular objections you chose are not particularly persuasive.

                    However, I think the broadest issue is not your insistence that the state is necessary, but rather your assumption that it must encompass all of politics.