On Mon, Aug 29, 2005 at 09:26:44PM +0800, Katipo wrote: > David Jardine wrote: > > >Wouldn't that give you the same result as a direct popular election, > >"mob rule" as you call it? > >
I wrote the above sentence, only to realise after I'd sent it off what nonsense it was. Apologies for the noise. I'd forgotten that your electoral system gives a person more or less voting power depending on what state he votes in. (Still a bit fairer than our (UK) system.) I presume that "mob rule" is prevented by the relative disenfranchisement of people in those states where voters are...er...well, might...er...well, what? How do you do it? > > > What I like about "mob rule", is that after the initial stages where a > dumbed down, general population had made a few painful mistakes, and it > had sunk in that they were big people now, that they might start > demanding things like a higher educational standard, so as to make for a > better informed, decision-making process. > This would also contribute to such aspects as transparency in > government, and before you know it, you'd be back living in a democratic > society again. > > Jefferson would sleep peacefully in his grave. > I still don't see the difference between "mob rule" (as used here) and democracy - and how electoral colleges produce the latter rather than the former. Cheers, David -- David Jardine "Running Debian GNU/Linux and loving every minute of it." -L. von Sacher-M.(1835-1895) -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
