4 ms·

Why is it crazy? Do you know the UN? Is it weird that countries like Benin or Qatar or Moldova have same vote in the UN general assembly as China or India or US

by smsm42 7y ago

Why is it crazy? Do you know the UN? Is it weird that countries like Benin or Qatar or Moldova have same vote in the UN general assembly as China or India or USA?

tekkk 7y ago
Yet in the EU parliament each country gets representatives proportionate to their size and the positions in the EU commission are filled basically how the larger countries decide? So your analogue doesn't really hold and frankly, just because UN (which gives their largest members veto-power), has one country one vote system, it's quite a stretch to extrapolate that to mean it would be a good fit for national governments too. Or how would you feel if some rural area in your home country got the same amount of votes than the whole capital? Would make perfect sense, right? But all in all, they are so different organizations serving very different purposes that comparing them isn't even that useful.
- jpollock 7y ago
  The EU is more complex than that, there's the European Council, which is not proportional to population (made up of the heads of state, like the original US Senate). The Council is involved in foreign affairs, particularly trade agreements. This is why Belgium had a veto over the Canada/EU trade agreement. In particular, it was Wallonia's PM who held the veto because Belgium devolved that power. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/24/eu-trade-deal-with-canada-collapses-as-belgium-refuses-to-sign https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/24/eu-trade-deal-...
- smsm42 7y ago
  > So your analogue doesn't really hold I think you miss the idea of how analogies work. If I say "the Moon is affected by Earth gravity just like an apple that falls down is" then if you way "but if I put an apple underwater then it'd flow up instead!" that doesn't mean my analogy didn't work. That means you are talking about different things that are outside of what analogy is about. The fact that EU didn't choose equal representation for member countries and as the result minor countries are powerless is exactly why minor states in the US do not want such arrangement. Just as with an example above about the apple, your counter-example does not disprove existence of gravity - or flaws in proportional representation between sovereign states - it in fact supports it, you just fail to see how. > Or how would you feel if some rural area in your home country got the same amount of votes than the whole capital? If that's the arrangement that is the condition of the union between the rural area and the capital - perfectly normal. I know Bill Gates has much more shares of Microsoft than I do and I don't feel bad about it. Why should I feel bad about those things?
threatofrain 7y ago
Why choose the UN whose story is one of inefficacy and being propped up by US power and money? The UN’s relevance has faded and nobody is optimistic for its resurgence. From that context we speak of sensible organizational practices? The fact is the idea that somebody born somewhere else has way more power has a smell, and people are talking about that smell now and whether they like it.
- smsm42 7y ago
  > UN whose story is one of inefficacy and being propped up by US power and money And yet, it exists and nobody is in a rush to disband it. Despite the fact that it's propped by US money but San Marino (population 33,344) has the same number of votes in UN GA as US. > The fact is the idea that somebody born somewhere else has way more power has a smell The only way all people can have exactly the same power if they all have no power at all. Otherwise there would always be somebody richer, smarter, more charismatic, more eloquent, born in better family with better education, etc. etc. which will give them more power. Absolute equality is possible only as equality in being destitute and powerless. Other aspect of it - I appreciate that somebody living in LA wants to have power over somebody living in rural Appalachia, because there's a lot of people in LA so obviously they should be ruling the whole country. But that's not how US as a country works, and I don't see why people in rural Appalachia would agree to such arrangement. So you have to either conquer them by force (and risk that they would conquer you by force instead) or come to a mutually agreeable arrangement, even if it deprives the LA people of their birthright powers of ruling Appalachia. That's the way it works.

by smsm42 7y ago

Why is it crazy? Do you know the UN? Is it weird that countries like Benin or Qatar or Moldova have same vote in the UN general assembly as China or India or USA?

tekkk 7y ago

Yet in the EU parliament each country gets representatives proportionate to their size and the positions in the EU commission are filled basically how the larger countries decide? So your analogue doesn't really hold and frankly, just because UN (which gives their largest members veto-power), has one country one vote system, it's quite a stretch to extrapolate that to mean it would be a good fit for national governments too. Or how would you feel if some rural area in your home country got the same amount of votes than the whole capital? Would make perfect sense, right? But all in all, they are so different organizations serving very different purposes that comparing them isn't even that useful.

jpollock 7y ago
The EU is more complex than that, there's the European Council, which is not proportional to population (made up of the heads of state, like the original US Senate). The Council is involved in foreign affairs, particularly trade agreements. This is why Belgium had a veto over the Canada/EU trade agreement. In particular, it was Wallonia's PM who held the veto because Belgium devolved that power. https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/24/eu-trade-deal-with-canada-collapses-as-belgium-refuses-to-sign https://www.theguardian.com/world/2016/oct/24/eu-trade-deal-...
smsm42 7y ago
> So your analogue doesn't really hold I think you miss the idea of how analogies work. If I say "the Moon is affected by Earth gravity just like an apple that falls down is" then if you way "but if I put an apple underwater then it'd flow up instead!" that doesn't mean my analogy didn't work. That means you are talking about different things that are outside of what analogy is about. The fact that EU didn't choose equal representation for member countries and as the result minor countries are powerless is exactly why minor states in the US do not want such arrangement. Just as with an example above about the apple, your counter-example does not disprove existence of gravity - or flaws in proportional representation between sovereign states - it in fact supports it, you just fail to see how. > Or how would you feel if some rural area in your home country got the same amount of votes than the whole capital? If that's the arrangement that is the condition of the union between the rural area and the capital - perfectly normal. I know Bill Gates has much more shares of Microsoft than I do and I don't feel bad about it. Why should I feel bad about those things?

threatofrain 7y ago

Why choose the UN whose story is one of inefficacy and being propped up by US power and money? The UN’s relevance has faded and nobody is optimistic for its resurgence. From that context we speak of sensible organizational practices? The fact is the idea that somebody born somewhere else has way more power has a smell, and people are talking about that smell now and whether they like it.

smsm42 7y ago
> UN whose story is one of inefficacy and being propped up by US power and money And yet, it exists and nobody is in a rush to disband it. Despite the fact that it's propped by US money but San Marino (population 33,344) has the same number of votes in UN GA as US. > The fact is the idea that somebody born somewhere else has way more power has a smell The only way all people can have exactly the same power if they all have no power at all. Otherwise there would always be somebody richer, smarter, more charismatic, more eloquent, born in better family with better education, etc. etc. which will give them more power. Absolute equality is possible only as equality in being destitute and powerless. Other aspect of it - I appreciate that somebody living in LA wants to have power over somebody living in rural Appalachia, because there's a lot of people in LA so obviously they should be ruling the whole country. But that's not how US as a country works, and I don't see why people in rural Appalachia would agree to such arrangement. So you have to either conquer them by force (and risk that they would conquer you by force instead) or come to a mutually agreeable arrangement, even if it deprives the LA people of their birthright powers of ruling Appalachia. That's the way it works.