On Sep 5, 2008, at 0:52 , Jonathan Lundell wrote:
On Sep 4, 2008, at 2:13 PM, Juho wrote:
I like natural districts, so one approach would be to let people
say and let history decide. The reason why I find "natural"
districts natural in politics is that when people feel like they
are part of some community it is easier to find consensus and
cooperate within that community. And of course the border lines
will then follow whatever natural dividing lines there are.
That seems wrong to me, but I don't have anything but subjective
impressions. Certainly for my local city council and school board
the community has no more consensus (and perhaps less) than one
finds at the state level. If anything, differences become more
pronounced locally.
What I meant was that electing a school board that is responsible for
the local school is more natural than electing a school board that is
responsible for 50% of one school and 50% of another school. In
geographical districts that would mean border lines that follow the
rivers, highways, traditional understanding etc.
People tend to be "patriotic" and they share and defend the common
"values" of units that they consider to be "their own". Having such
natural units in politics could be considered positive as long as
people don't get too patriotic (and e.g. start "wars" against the
"competing units").
I agree that local matters are often more difficult to handle
peacefully than some more general matters. But natural districting
may still be considered a positive thing also at local level.
Juho
___________________________________________________________
To help you stay safe and secure online, we've developed the all new Yahoo! Security Centre. http://uk.security.yahoo.com
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
