California Stand

[LocalParty.Org]

LocalParty.Org hopes a good third party will start to exist in our otherwise two party system. We sincerely hope the NH movement will succeed.

LocalParty.Org (we're California based) delivers information on why the two party system is so restrictive, and why only the two parties are mostly successful (though not everywhere).

Our system is much like walking into a car dealership: when looking for a car to buy, and seeing that they only have two models available, the disappointing shocker becomes obvious for there is not much choice at all. Far worse, however, is the fact that, next, you have to buy the car the majority of the clients want. You don't get to choose the car you want: it is decided collectively for you.

If a third party becomes an option (which we hope), the car dealership does not all of a sudden have three models to sell: only two models are for sale at each car dealership, but now, some car dealerships may have a different set of two models instead. Nevertheless, if you walk into your dealership, you still have to get the car the majority chooses.

LocalParty.Org has three goals: promote local political competition, when possible help change the district system into that of PR, and deliver education where that seems appropriate (hopefully you will accept us at this site too).

The alternative? In Proportional Representation you walk into a dealership with plenty of choice, and you get the car you want.

Which of the two options sounds more like the American way to you?

http://localparty.org

[LocalParty.Org]

In the following graphic two democracies are shown: on the left side the district system, on the right side proportional elections. The actual outcomes of the United States Senate (soon to be changed) are used as an example for district elections, while the national elections in Sweden are used as an example for proportional elections. And it shows, it takes a lot more voters to have a majority in proportional elections than we have here in the US. The graphs show up too small on this website, but you can see how the orange on the left is half as small (18% of all eligible voters) as the orange space on the right side (40% of all eligible voters). More information on democratic engines: http://www.localparty.org/engine.html

[attachment deleted by admin]

[LocalParty.Org]

This may be the last post created on this web site. The graphs we are very proud of hardly show up. Here is another one: It shows the trend of voter turn-out over a long period of time for various democracies. The yellow/orange color shows which nations elect in districts, the green which nations vote in proportional elections, and in blue which nations make use of a mix of both versions.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[LocalParty.Org]

No. not much luck with the grahs: they are too small. Farewell then, and good luck with getting Libertarians on the political map. I end with one more map on income and consumption distribution of the 10% richest people in all nations of the world.

Best regards,

LocalParty.Org

[attachment deleted by admin]

[KBCraig]

No. not much luck with the grahs: they are too small.

The graphs are just fine. All you have to do to see them is click on them.

Farewell then, and good luck with getting Libertarians on the political map.

Might want to learn how the forum works before giving up so easily.

Kevin

[Fluff and Stuff]

Other- Those sound like types of republican government, not democratic.  A democratic government is like a small town in NH, for example.  Whereas, American has a republican form of government.

[MattLeft]

"Question:      What kind of democracy delivers the most freedom to its people?"

There's no check-box for "Democracies don't deliver freedom.  They rob it."  I hate how damn near everyone just haphazzardly tosses around certain words.  As much as it galls me to quote a popmous, hippocritiucal douche-bag like Rush Limbaugh:  Words mean things.

[LocalParty.Org]

I am glad to read that none of you is willing to give up so easily. Too many Americans don't care that much about politics, so that's a nice change. Thanks for taking the trouble to click on the graph links.

Words mean things

If words are important, then I would like to hear your opinion on what the word representative means.

[Dreepa]

popmous, hippocritiucal douche-bag like Rush Limbaugh: 

[burnthebeautiful]

One vote for town, one vote for county, one vote for national. That's the way we do it here in Sweden, you can vote for 3 different parties if you want. Personally I voted for The Moderate Party on town and local, and the libertarian party on the national level.

[KurtDaBear]

I'm with Dude.  Pure democracy becomes mobocracy when it advances beyond the level at which you can have direct influence, knowledge and input. i.e., the aforementioned town meetings.

Our current democratic representative republic isn't all that bad, and it would be better if so many liberals and do-gooders hadn't messed with it over the last century.

Anyone from Calif. should know how destructive pure democracy can be in a large venue just by thinking back over a few of the things that have made the ballots in the Calif. initiative process over the past decade.  (I realize Calif.'s liberal initiative process is necessary to get around our state's highly politicized, corrupt, do-nothing legislature, but it's sure a messy way of doing it.)

Case in point would be the fact that Italy, which arguably has had the world's most screwed up government since the end of WW II, is at the top of the democratic participation graph posted earlier.
If the US had been a pure democracy, slavery would still be legal and women would be waiting for the right to vote.

[d_goddard]

It ain't so much the system of voting, as much as the apathy of the voters, and the do-gooders who run for office thinking they can make the world a better place.... by getting their people in control of the government apparatus.

[Dreepa]

.... by getting their people in control of the government apparatus.

.... and spending my money.

[slim]

A democracy means that 51% of the people are the rulers of the other 49%. Which means that the 49% will become indentured servants to the majority. Humm that does not seem like a good type of government to me.

Government does not deliver freedom. Your ability to exercise your rights is what freedom is.

[LocalParty.Org]

Cool answers with me.

A democracy means that 51% of the people are the rulers of the other 49%.

That is only true when 100% of the people go vote. If 40% stays home, 51% is actually only 30.5% (which can happen in any democracy). And if on top of that 40% of those who do vote, vote for the loser (which is what happens in district elections where winner-takes-all), 51% is only 18%, Slim. Quite scary, isn't it?

Italy has compulsory voting, so there's a good reason for ending up in top of the list of voter turn-out. But politics there are a hot issue that makes people really come out to vote too, and with the many choices available to them, Italians actually have a lot of freedom. The one thing, though, that really screws up their system is that their coalition government must have the green light not from one, but from both houses. No other democracy does it that way (as far as I know), and in my eyes it doesn't make much sense; why create a balance that can get tipped by two different houses?

I agree with you about your California remark, Kurt. While initiatives are great when you're stuck in the mud to get yourself unstuck, they are still nothing more than up and down votes on issues that were presented by interest groups. Democracy should be more intelligent than that ? but it is still better than just having the two parties take turns for it allows for more citizen participation.