--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > your argument appears to be that those who can glob onto more power > over others, relative to their population, will do so. No huge insight > there. The question is whether a democracy of one-person one vote is > more reflective of the will of the people than systems where some > peoples vote count 10x, sometimes 100x of others. > > Let Canadians do what they will. In the US, I advocate one-person one > vote. And the abolishment of hugely distortianal systems like the > electoral college which not only distorts the will of the popular vote > (Gore 2000) but makes all but a handful states mere observers, not > participants in national elections. I lived in California most of my > life. In memory, few presidential candidates ever visited or spent > energy in California. What kind of system is that where the most > populous state, the largest state economy, and some would venture the > most creative, innovation and research-focussed state, is basically > excluded from presidential systems. > > Blame the election on Iowans! :)
I ask you again: Where is one-man-one-vote -- which you claim is the standard almost everywhere -- the standard? > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "shempmcgurk" <shempmcgurk@> > wrote: > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, new.morning <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> wrote: > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, "authfriend" <jstein@> > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > --- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB <no_reply@> > > wrote: > > > > > <snip> > > > > > > Americans as a whole don't care whether the people in the > > > > > > Third World live or die. That's why they elect leaders > > > > > > who don't care whether these people live or die and who > > > > > > design and implement their global strategies accordingly. > > > > > > > > > > Well, no, not "Americans as a whole." > > > > > > > > > > More than 51 million Americans voted *against* > > > > > George Bush in 2000; more than 59 million voted > > > > > against him in 2004. > > > > > > > > > > Unfortunately only around 60 percent of those > > > > > eligible to vote actually voted in 2004, so we > > > > > don't know how the rest felt. But we *do* know > > > > > that less than a third of voters actually pulled > > > > > the lever for Bush. > > > > > > > > We DO know how those who didn't vote felt. > > > > > > > > They didn't care enough even to vote. > > > > > > > > Therefore in effect they voted. > > > > > > > > Bush is President because the American people > > > > caused him to be there, via comission or omission. > > > > > > > > > Your "theory" appears to presume the US is a pure democracy -- one > > > person, one vote. While that is the standard throughout much of the > > > civilized world > > > > > > > > > > > > Oh, really? > > > > Tell us where this is a standard, please. > > > > Often, the "one-man-one-vote" standard is purposely NOT built into a > > country's democratic system. > > > > For example, where you have minorities, the one-man-one-vote > > principal can wipe out their individual and minority rights and, > > often, a country's constitution will provide protections for them. > > In Canada where I'm from, the constitution provided certain > > minorities guaranteed minimum seats in pariament, despite their > > dwindling numbers or their percentage of the population. > > > > The most blatant example of that is the tiny Island of Prince Edward > > Island with a population of about 150,000. The Canadian > > constitution guarantees them 4 seats in the federal parliament > > whereas if it were done on the basis of one-man-one-vote they'd get > > less than one. > > > > And one of the big complaints by provinces such as Alberta is that > > the one-man-one-vote principle is grossly unfair to them in ther > > federal parliament. Alberta didn't exist when Canada and its > > constitution were created in 1867. Today, relative to Ontario and > > Quebec, Alberta and B.C. have little population and have no hope of > > being a majority in parliament. Capture the votes of just Ontario > > and some of Quebec and the other 8 provinces can be ignored. And > > that's why separation is not just a Quebec phenomenon but an Alberta > > one as well. > > > > Indeed, Alberta has been crying for decades for precisely the sort > > of thing that you rail against below: the distortion of and > > antithesis of one-man-one-vote...that is, a Senate with equal > > provincial representation in a bicameral legislature. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > the US is a democratic back water. > > > > > > It remains a backwater of darkness and corruption due to i) the > > > electoral college (Gore won in 2000 -- the was the true reflection > > of > > > US will), ii) a bi-cameral system of legislature where one house is > > > the antithesis of one persone, one vote, and the other is so > > rigged > > > (jerrymandering) that only 10% or so of races are actually > > competitive > > > -- that is -- democratic. The rest of the races are simple > > > power-maintnenace by entrenched "rulers". Further, out-of-state > > > contribution to local races, corrupt lobbying rules and campaign > > > finance, and no centralized national election rules -- allowing > > local > > > corruption (Ohio, Florida, Kathleen Smith, paperless trail voting > > > machines) all are choking the true will of the people by entrenched > > > powers. > > > > > > With so many distortions in in ts so-called democracy, democracy in > > > the US is a sick patient in intensive care. Hardly vibrant and > > > reflective of the will of the people. The US currently is more than > > > than not, a banana republic of entrenched powers sustaining their > > > power. Its not a wonder corrupt low-vibe policies are developed and > > > implemented. > > > > > > How to break the black-shroud of darkeness choking american > > democracy? > > > > > > To subscribe, send a message to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Or go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ and click 'Join This Group!' Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/ <*> Your email settings: Individual Email | Traditional <*> To change settings online go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/FairfieldLife/join (Yahoo! ID required) <*> To change settings via email: mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
