Democracy might be mathematically impossible – here’s why. Head to https://brilliant.org/veritasium to start your free 30-day trial and get 20% off an annual...
Read my edit, the video is a waste of time. That a mathematically accurate democracy is impossible is obvious. Just by the fact that no democracy has 100% voter participation. And forcing the vote makes it prone to errors too. This is a no-brainer, and completely irrelevant.
It’s also a strawman, argument, as nobody ever claimed that democracies are mathematically accurate.
Also, this video delves into which family of voting systems can be the closest to a perfect democracy.
That’s an interesting theme, the they should have made a headline that reflects that instead.
I’m guessing however, that it’s ONLY about the form of voting, where removing first past the post alone, will make you achieve about 90% of the optimal democratic result.
The countries considered the best democracies in the world, with way above 90% score, all have traditional majority voting systems, and none of the fancy systems that have become popular to debate, especially in countries with first past the post systems, muddying the debate, confusing people, and ultimately preventing improving their democracies to something that actually works.
This may be of scholarly interest, but is mostly irrelevant to democracies that want to improve.
Read my edit, the video is a waste of time. That a mathematically accurate democracy is impossible is obvious. Just by the fact that no democracy has 100% voter participation. And forcing the vote makes it prone to errors too. This is a no-brainer, and completely irrelevant.
It’s also a strawman, argument, as nobody ever claimed that democracies are mathematically accurate.
They have the same approach to life: if it can’t be perfect (heaven) Imma make it a living hell for the non-elect
That’s not how scientific proofs work. Also, this video delves into which family of voting systems can be the closest to a perfect democracy.
It is relevant as we should be considering ways to move away from plurality voting, which sucks.
Huh? Haven’t you ever seen mathematical proofs in your life? Why should proofs always be about disproving something? What are you talking about here?
That’s an interesting theme, the they should have made a headline that reflects that instead.
I’m guessing however, that it’s ONLY about the form of voting, where removing first past the post alone, will make you achieve about 90% of the optimal democratic result.
The countries considered the best democracies in the world, with way above 90% score, all have traditional majority voting systems, and none of the fancy systems that have become popular to debate, especially in countries with first past the post systems, muddying the debate, confusing people, and ultimately preventing improving their democracies to something that actually works.
This may be of scholarly interest, but is mostly irrelevant to democracies that want to improve.