• UraniumBlazer@lemm.eeOP
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    2 months ago

    That a mathematically accurate democracy is impossible is obvious.

    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.

    This is a no-brainer, and completely irrelevant.

    It is relevant as we should be considering ways to move away from plurality voting, which sucks.

    It’s also a strawman, argument, as nobody ever claimed that democracies are mathematically accurate.

    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?

    • Buffalox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      2 months ago

      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.