The Baha'i Studies Listserv Now that I look closely at the chart, they aren't right now, but the Economist projected The Pirate Party to become the largest third party in Germany.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_Democratic_Party_(Germany) Also, the FDP is in a coalition govt with the CDU slash CSU! Sent from my iPad On Nov 26, 2012, at 11:38 AM, Stephen Kent Gray <[email protected]> wrote: > Actually, what I've read and heard is that if any small party is going to wag > the dog in the future in Germany, it's the Pirate Party. It's rising in the > polls. > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Parties_International > http://www.economist.com/news/europe/21566671-confusion-reigns-germanys-party-politics-may-not-affect-who-wins-next-years-election-when > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pirate_Party_Germany > > Sent from my iPad > > On Nov 25, 2012, at 1:30 PM, Ian Kluge <[email protected]> wrote: > >> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >> "If the party with a plurality didn't get a majority, then they don't have a >> mandate and they actually should make concessions to the other parties. How >> is that undemocratic?" >> >> It is undemocratic because the small party can force major concessions out >> of all proportions to the size of its constituency. Hence, "wag the dog." >> >> This is not just theory. Israel is the best example of how muich damage PR >> can cause. Even in its German variant. PR has the "wag the dog" problem >> insofar as a the Greens with about 12% of the vote can force through massive >> changes like the shutting down of nuclear power stations. (Merkel is now >> trying to wriggle out of that because most Germans think this is nuts.) >> >> Again, there is no perfect voting system. It's just a matter of choosing >> "your cleanest dirty shirt." >> >> Best wishes, >> >> Ian >> >> >> >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Gilberto Simpson >> To: Baha'i Studies >> Sent: Sunday, November 25, 2012 10:14 AM >> Subject: Re: Religious rejection of politics >> >> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >> 4 percent sounds like a fair and reasonable threshold. I don't see how your >> wag the dog scenario is a big problem. If there is a party that can get an >> outright majority then they have a mandate and don't need to make major >> concessions to smaller parties. If the party with a plurality didn't get a >> majority, then they don't have a mandate and they actually should make >> concessions to the other parties. How is that undemocratic? >> >> I would suggest the wag the dog problem is actually worse in the two-party >> system. Republican (and Democratic) candidates have to satisfy several >> different constituencies and each of them gets a huge amount of power. I >> suspect that under proportional representation, new parties could afford to >> form and would have more rational amounts of power. The Republicans might >> split up into a Christian conservative party, an anti-immigrant party a >> pro-business party, or Ron Paul style libertarians. The Tea Party could be >> an actual party. The Democrats might became a more unashamedly >> pro-labor/working class party, The Green Party or an "Occupy" party would be >> viable. On either side of the spectrum, the fringes could be marginalized >> and a coalition between more reasonable voices could be formed. >> >> On Thu, Nov 22, 2012 at 12:56 PM, Ian Kluge <[email protected]> wrote: >>> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >>> This true only if there is no minimum percentage threshold a party must >>> attain to get representation. Germany, Sweden, Norway, for example, have a >>> 4 or 5% threshold. >>> >>> The biggest argument against proportional representation is the "wag the >>> dog" scenario, in which parties holding a small percentage of the vote can >>> extract major concessions from other parties to form a ruling coalition. In >>> efferct this gives very small parties power far beyond their actual support >>> in the population. This, too, is highly undemocratic - and wastes the votes >>> of the majority. >>> >>> There is no perfect voting method and it's a question of selecting "the >>> cleanest dirty shirt." >>> >>> Best wishes, >>> >>> Ian >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Gilberto Simpson >>> To: Baha'i Studies >>> Sent: Wednesday, November 21, 2012 11:24 PM >>> Subject: Re: Religious rejection of politics >>> >>> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >>> My sense is that Parliamentary systems with proportional representation >>> encourage sincere voting. Under such a system, if the Green Party is >>> closest to your beliefs, and even if they only get 5% of the vote they'll >>> at least get 5% of the seats in Parliament and would be a voice in the >>> government and could form coalitions with other parties. There wouldn't be >>> the whole "wasted vote" issue. >>> >>> On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 4:20 PM, Susan Maneck <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> The Baha'i Studies Listserv >>>> > LL scores people have said they tend Democrat even though they're closer >>>> > to >>>> > Green Party or Jill Stein >>>> > Socialist Party USA or Stewart Alexander >>>> >>>> That's part of the problem with the party system. You vote for what >>>> you think you can get, not for what you think is right. >>>> >>>> __________________________________________________ >>>> You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[email protected] >>>> Unsubscribe: send a blank email to >>>> mailto:leave-676149-68452.e157d5dc5efabb63696f251595c88...@list.jccc.edu >>>> Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to >>>> [email protected] >>>> Or subscribe: >>>> http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st >>>> Baha'i Studies is available through the following: >>>> Mail - mailto:[email protected] >>>> Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st >>>> News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st >>>> Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >>>> New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] >> __________________________________________________ You are subscribed to Baha'i Studies as: mailto:[email protected] Unsubscribe: send a blank email to mailto:leave-676340-27401.54f46e81b66496c9909bcdc2f7987...@list.jccc.edu Subscribe: send subscribe bahai-st in the message body to [email protected] Or subscribe: http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/all_forums/subscribe?name=bahai-st Baha'i Studies is available through the following: Mail - mailto:[email protected] Web - http://list.jccc.edu:8080/read/?forum=bahai-st News (on-campus only) - news://list.jccc.edu/bahai-st Old Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected] New Public - http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]
