Hey Troy, I appreciate the response! I buy that you aren't motivated by this one city council position in particular. But we can't escape the fact that every po

Hey Troy, I appreciate the response! I buy that you aren't motivated by this one city council position in particular. But we can't escape the fact that every policy decision exists in our particular reality and has material effects. There's no such thing as an ideologically-neutral electoral system, of all things, because a change in system will select different candidates from the actual pool of existing candidates or types of candidates. Wealthy elites don't care what policy choices are optimal in terms of some abstract desiderata[1], they push for the policies that will be best for them materially. Working people need to understand that and behave the same way. To take a different example: Republicans in the U.S. push for voter ID laws because they favor Republican election outcomes. This is pretty well understood. A voter ID law appears on its face ideologically neutral. It still is meant to bring about a certain outcome, and should be fought on the basis of that outcome. It doesn't even matter if somebody pushing the legislation has a different intention, even a noble one! --- [1] Incidentally, I'm not really sure how well AV even meets those desiderata. For example, does a non-Condorcet system really reflect voters' preferences most accurately? Later-no-harm is another criteria that comes to mind. I'm skeptical of the claim that AV is really "more reflective" in some objective sense than FPTP.