4 ms·

I don’t quite understand why reforming the actual system, and moving away from first-past-the-post, isn’t higher on everyone’s list. It feels like we don’t hav

by heeton 1y ago

I don’t quite understand why reforming the actual system, and moving away from first-past-the-post, isn’t higher on everyone’s list. It feels like we don’t have a functioning democracy in the U.K., and that gets in the way of pretty much everything else.

noja 1y ago
I think the very idea that a single party would encompass a voter's entire set of beliefs is ridiculous and antiquated.
bell-cot 1y ago
The current first-past-the-post system works quite well, for those who have the power to change the system. Vs. - in the last U.K. election, which party was the most vocal about that first-past-the-post system needing replacement? What % of the votes were cast for them?
- d1sxeyes 1y ago
  This was relatively recently floated (2011) and thrown out to referendum (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Kingdom_Alternat...), where it was watered down to Alternative Vote rather than full PR and eventually rejected. Obviously none of these 16 year olds would have been old enough to vote in the referendum (or indeed have been born when it took place). ~One thing to bear in mind is that FPTP limits the influence of “extreme” parties on elections (see UKIP’s vote share in 2015), but at the expense of requiring more mainstream parties to pander to those voters to avoid splitting the vote share. Jury is still out I think on what’s “best” here and probably depends on what “best” means to the person forming an opinion.~ Edit: turns out the above is at best contested, at worst disproven.
  - roenxi 1y ago
    FPTP tends to be the system that most reliably favours extreme candidates [0] - everything else promotes candidates who are most in tune community norms. Candidates who don't align with any of the voters tend not to get in under any fundamentally democratic system - someone who is willing to do what they're promising but more in tune with the voters have an easy time against that sort of candidate. Although just from browsing the UKs AV proposal it does look like it'd be similar to IRV which has some wild results in certain tight races. Although I personally think that is fine; a little randomness is good for the system. [0] http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/ http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
    - d1sxeyes 1y ago
      Interesting, I previously understood this as an established fact, but turns out there are some very convincing arguments that show that I am wrong on this. Thank you for the challenge and correction.
  - pjc50 1y ago
    It was a huge mess; basically the only people properly backing it were the Lib Dems, Labour were not out there in favor of it and in any case the media (overwhelmingly Tory) were against it. Just as with Brexit. The UK is basically not to be trusted with referendums. The weird thing is how many different election systems are in use in the UK depending on what the politics of each devolved assembly is "supposed to be".
    - d1sxeyes 1y ago
      Tell me about it. The whole thing was basically a bone thrown to Nick Clegg to entice the Lib Dems into the coalition. As far as I can tell, this neutered referendum was the only thing the Lib Dems got out of the coalition government, and even that wasn’t the PR referendum they pushed during the election campaign. I lived in his constituency at the time and I am ashamed to admit I voted for him. It’s a travesty to see what has happened since (not just the whole coalition thing, his work with Meta too).
roenxi 1y ago
The article suggests that the people in charge of the system want children to be more involved in making political decisions. This signals a lot about what is happening in elite circles. If that is the nature of the atmosphere then I doubt many important people are going to put their head above the parapet and call for reforms in the direction of adults getting better political expression. The power holders don't think that is favourable to them.
terminalshort 1y ago
Because the party in power feels like they can win > 50% of the 16-17 year old vote and therefore it is an advantage to them. They do not feel that moving away from FPP is an advantage to them. Functioning democracy is not their goal. Staying in power is.
- plantain 1y ago
  Nonsense. Labour (largely) supported ditching first past the post in the referendum. The opposition/conservative party campaigned against it.
  - robin_reala 1y ago
    Every time Labour gets into power, FPTP reformation is mysteriously never considered.
  - leereeves 1y ago
    Labour was out of power at the time, and Conservatives were in power, so that's not a counterexample.
  - mytailorisrich 1y ago
    Labour has an overwhelming majority in Parliament right now despite a relatively poor share of the vote because of FPTP. As long as Reform UK splits the Tory vote FPTP will continue to be in Labour's interests. In fact, at the moment moving away from FPTP would mostly benefit Reform UK and the Lib Dems, possibly the Tories, too as this point.
plantain 1y ago
They had a referendum on it in 2011 and decided to keep FPTP. You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make it drink.
aqme28 1y ago
That's a lot harder than changing a number by 2
mytailorisrich 1y ago
Lowering the voting age is a purely tactical move by Labour because they think that it will favour them.

by heeton 1y ago

noja 1y ago

I think the very idea that a single party would encompass a voter's entire set of beliefs is ridiculous and antiquated.

bell-cot 1y ago

The current first-past-the-post system works quite well, for those who have the power to change the system. Vs. - in the last U.K. election, which party was the most vocal about that first-past-the-post system needing replacement? What % of the votes were cast for them?

d1sxeyes 1y ago
This was relatively recently floated (2011) and thrown out to referendum (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Kingdom_Alternative_Vote_referendum https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_United_Kingdom_Alternat...), where it was watered down to Alternative Vote rather than full PR and eventually rejected. Obviously none of these 16 year olds would have been old enough to vote in the referendum (or indeed have been born when it took place). ~One thing to bear in mind is that FPTP limits the influence of “extreme” parties on elections (see UKIP’s vote share in 2015), but at the expense of requiring more mainstream parties to pander to those voters to avoid splitting the vote share. Jury is still out I think on what’s “best” here and probably depends on what “best” means to the person forming an opinion.~ Edit: turns out the above is at best contested, at worst disproven.
- roenxi 1y ago
  FPTP tends to be the system that most reliably favours extreme candidates [0] - everything else promotes candidates who are most in tune community norms. Candidates who don't align with any of the voters tend not to get in under any fundamentally democratic system - someone who is willing to do what they're promising but more in tune with the voters have an easy time against that sort of candidate. Although just from browsing the UKs AV proposal it does look like it'd be similar to IRV which has some wild results in certain tight races. Although I personally think that is fine; a little randomness is good for the system. [0] http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/ http://zesty.ca/voting/sim/
  - d1sxeyes 1y ago
    Interesting, I previously understood this as an established fact, but turns out there are some very convincing arguments that show that I am wrong on this. Thank you for the challenge and correction.
- pjc50 1y ago
  It was a huge mess; basically the only people properly backing it were the Lib Dems, Labour were not out there in favor of it and in any case the media (overwhelmingly Tory) were against it. Just as with Brexit. The UK is basically not to be trusted with referendums. The weird thing is how many different election systems are in use in the UK depending on what the politics of each devolved assembly is "supposed to be".
  - d1sxeyes 1y ago
    Tell me about it. The whole thing was basically a bone thrown to Nick Clegg to entice the Lib Dems into the coalition. As far as I can tell, this neutered referendum was the only thing the Lib Dems got out of the coalition government, and even that wasn’t the PR referendum they pushed during the election campaign. I lived in his constituency at the time and I am ashamed to admit I voted for him. It’s a travesty to see what has happened since (not just the whole coalition thing, his work with Meta too).

roenxi 1y ago

The article suggests that the people in charge of the system want children to be more involved in making political decisions. This signals a lot about what is happening in elite circles. If that is the nature of the atmosphere then I doubt many important people are going to put their head above the parapet and call for reforms in the direction of adults getting better political expression. The power holders don't think that is favourable to them.

terminalshort 1y ago

Because the party in power feels like they can win > 50% of the 16-17 year old vote and therefore it is an advantage to them. They do not feel that moving away from FPP is an advantage to them. Functioning democracy is not their goal. Staying in power is.

plantain 1y ago
Nonsense. Labour (largely) supported ditching first past the post in the referendum. The opposition/conservative party campaigned against it.
- robin_reala 1y ago
  Every time Labour gets into power, FPTP reformation is mysteriously never considered.
- leereeves 1y ago
  Labour was out of power at the time, and Conservatives were in power, so that's not a counterexample.
- mytailorisrich 1y ago
  Labour has an overwhelming majority in Parliament right now despite a relatively poor share of the vote because of FPTP. As long as Reform UK splits the Tory vote FPTP will continue to be in Labour's interests. In fact, at the moment moving away from FPTP would mostly benefit Reform UK and the Lib Dems, possibly the Tories, too as this point.

plantain 1y ago

They had a referendum on it in 2011 and decided to keep FPTP. You can lead the horse to water, but you can't make it drink.

aqme28 1y ago

That's a lot harder than changing a number by 2

mytailorisrich 1y ago

Lowering the voting age is a purely tactical move by Labour because they think that it will favour them.