Good Morning, Juho Very well said. I hope you're right. I hope we can improve our political systems in less than 200 years. But, as you point out, "... the current establishment always has clear reasons to oppose any changes." That will make the process slow, and, possibly, painful.
You mention the growth of corruption as a possible alternative to the attainment of a more democratic government. There is little doubt of the cyclical nature of human interaction; "a tide in the affairs of man" as Shakespeare put it. Society constantly moves between states of high principle and abject baseness We can never know precisely where we are in that cycle. In fact, even though we are all a part of it, people's perception of the cycle differs. Not many young people can see the change from the human-oriented society of my youth to the corporate-dominated society we endure today. For most of them, "It is what it is". They attach little importance to the obscure and arcane legislation that enabled the transition and are even less inclined to seek an understanding of how and why it happened. Is it hopeless to think we will ever look inside ourselves and learn to harness our own natures to the task of improving society? re: "... change will come when ... the citizens have some basic reason (dissatisfaction) to change the current system." One of our challenges is to prepare well-reasoned alternatives before any change occurs. There is a risk that dissatisfaction will lead to violence, and violence thrives on emotion at the expense of reason. We would do well to forestall that eventuality. Since our political institutions reflect our nature, do you think I should be surprised that so few seem willing to look at how our systems evolved? Are we so proud of our tendency toward partisanship that we're unwilling to look at how easily it is used to exploit us? Are we so anxious to say "I'm right. You're wrong." that we won't consider alternatives? It is unfortunate that those who have written to me privately on this topic have not added their expertise to our public discussion. I'm deeply grateful for your participation which helps me see the issues more clearly. Your comments on secret voting led me to examine the voting process in greater detail than I had before. There are any number of other subtleties worthy of deeper thought. For example in a dynamic system of the type we've been discussing, some folks who are elected to public office will not be re-elected. In our House of Representatives in the U. S., we would be asking people to take two years out of their life for public service with no guarantee that they will not be out of a job after two years. Shouldn't our political system provide the means and the money for their transition to private life? Fred ---- Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info