3 ms·
I see this argument mentioned often, but what would really change with a well informed and educated population? They would still need to elect representatives
by dudul 6y ago
I see this argument mentioned often, but what would really change with a well informed and educated population? They would still need to elect representatives from 2 different parties. Representatives who would still operate in the current framework. We would still see lobbies, bad short term policies implemented to be reelected, etc.
- dcow 6y agoSupport voting reform in an effort to weaken the grasp our first pst the post system retains on our politics?
- deleted 6y ago[deleted]
- n4r9 6y agoI guess the idea is that those two parties would have more to gain from having evidence-based policies, and more to lose from outright lies.
- dudul 6y agoWould they? I'm gonna be cynical here but why would they care? What would the "educated people" do otherwise? Not vote? So what? One of the 2 parties would gain power regardless.
- n4r9 6y agoIf the populace are better educated, informed, and engaged, then having policies which are more evidence-based than your opponents' is more likely to get a greater vote share. This shifts the direction of the arms race away from senseless posturing and towards actual policy debate. That's the idea at least, and I think it's worth considering. But yes, speaking as someone looking in to the US from outside, a more proportional voting system would also do wonders for your democratic legitimacy.