28 ms·
Competition in a government space would be a good thing, imo. For a while at least. Beats being quite permanently attached to a shitty gov at birth.
by nickflood 6y ago
Competition in a government space would be a good thing, imo. For a while at least. Beats being quite permanently attached to a shitty gov at birth.
- pschastain 6y agoKinda what voting is for - to change the current gov't.
- aljungberg 6y agoVoting can be helpful, but not always. For a long time the voting majority in some places thought treating black people as lesser human beings was fair. In those cases, having the option to easily choose a different government would be useful. In a way, having states in the US is that idea. E.g. moving from a deeply racist southern state during the height of equal but separate era to a more progressive state would have given you far better results than voting in terms of how you were treated by the local government.
- close04 6y ago> having the option to easily choose a different government would be useful This opens everyone up to the kind of complexity nobody is ready for. - Would the groups split under different governments but sharing the same territory? Who has the final word? - Do they split the territory? Who gets the better one? - In any group someone will be unhappy with the treatment. How many times do you split and "get your own government"? - Maybe the competition is between the already established governments of existing countries. What happens when one government (or the people it represents) doesn't what specific people from joining the group?
- syshum 6y agoDepends on the type of voting employed. First Past the Post (what most nations us) is not a way to pick a true representative official, it breads defensive voting, vote spoiling, and all kinds of other problems where you end up in a spiral of worse and worse people, and where everyone says "I do not want either option but...."