MyBrainHurts

Great question! In the very short term, sort of. (Though from the start I'd point out that it is much harder to envision a party like the AFD gaining traction in an FPTP system)

PR causes 2 different styles of issues with the AFD. 1) It makes politics much less likely to produce significant or helpful change, so people don't see meaningful political improvements in their lives and are more likely to turn to extremist parties like the AFD. and 2) Because the AFD has so many seats, the winning coalition has to be super broad, basically the same coalition of the Conservative and Progressives that was seen as ineffectual the last time around. Admittedly, this time they can exclude the Greens. The same reasons the previous government collapsed and led to such a significant rise in support for the AFD are still in effect.

Austria doesn’t have an extremist government

Sure, but Kickl almost came to power in large part as a result of general dissatisfaction with politics in Austrai because... You guessed it, PR leads to not particularly effective government.

Israel’s democracy is flawed as the foundation of the country is dubious.

You can disagree with the creation of Israel etc but I fail to see how that means that we don't have to pay attention to their experience with PR.

Poland’s culture on issues is different

So the Polish culture is just inherently racist and tends to autocracy? I really hate this line of argument, it's the same sort of stuff that has been historically used dismiss the humanity of Black and Indigenous people.

If the majority of the people want fascism it’s going to happen in any electoral system,

Not saying FPTP is perfect. 2 party systems tend not to be great either. That's why I'm really happy that Canada has a wide mix, from NDP to the Bloc, to the Conservatives.

You also conveniently left out Norway, Ireland, Denmark, Switzerland

Yes... And you haven't pointed out all the successful countries that use FPTP, or do you really think there are no successful countries with FPTP?

How is that a “bad outcome” when it’s literally what people voted for.

You don't see how abhorrent racist parties taking power is a bad outcome?

Is this worse than the big tent parties we have now,

Yes. We've just passed a national school lunch program, are working on affordable day care and expanding healthcare to cover dental work. For better or worse, the Liberals have a very clear record you can vote on, whether you think they allowed too much immigration or you support their work on childcare, they have a clear record that they own and we are thus able to vote on it. This is not possible in a PR system. (What were the things your party actually made happen vs the results of messy compromises with a dozen parties? In the German context, as they'll need literally every party to avoid working with the AFD, how are you possibly able to apportion blame or praise on any party?)

We are discussing proportional representation vs non-proportional representation.

Again, I refer you to your quote: "The responsibility of the electoral system is to ensure **effective **representation in government" I'm pointing out that there are trade offs. You could establish 100% representation but it would be terrible. Similarly, sure you can argue that PR leads to more representation but that doesn't mean that it is effective representation.

Tends to produce bad outcomes how exactly? You would need to describe an outcome that you would not see under any democracy.

The ability of small parties to hold a majority hostage. Think about the extreme right in Israel, who despite being fairly unpopular are pushing ahead some fairly aggressive anti-Palestinian moves. This caaaaaaaaan happen in a fptp system but is much less likely.

Sacrifices the efficiency of government how? And is “efficiency” more important than policy that the majority actually agree on?

Again, I refer you to pretty much everything I've already written about the German system. Being paralyzed means the government can't pass significant legislation, which has led to significant problems and perversely, the rise of groups like the AFD.

Your argument against PR is that voting is “inefficient”, therefore we should allow non-proportional governments?

That's not at all what I've said.

How is it “temporary” democratic gain, when there are more mathematical criteria satisfied under PR systems for producing democratic systems?

In the short run, if you can vote for any party but none of the parties are able to really affect change, how democratic or useful is your vote?

In the long run, it leads to more people being willing to abandon democracy as PR systems tend to be unable to deliver significant change. If democracy doesn't help, more people are willing to turn to autocrats.

Oh dang, I do love me some Ayoade! (If anyone hasn't seen it, Garth Merenghi's Dark Place is one of the first things he wrote and is fantastic, trailer .

My first thought

But hey, if my country needs me...

I didn't realize what community I was in, I thought this was a more general one. Seems rude to come in and argue the merits of PR in a community devoted to it, apologies, I'm happy to let it be.

blame the culture, not the electoral system.

If you read about what's happening in those countries, you'll realize it's not about the culture, it's that PR incentivizes really bad outcomes. Take Germany for example. Just like here, a small minority of people would vote for really hateful parties that are toxic and should be avoided. However, avoiding them has made the other parties form really broad and thus ineffective coalitions, which are unable to push forward significant legislation. The increasing inability to pass significant legislation has led to Germany's stalling development, which then further fuels extremist parties.

Similarly, you'll see in Israel where mainstream parties are held hostage by relatively small extremist parties leading to horrific outcomes that are generally not supported by the public.

I basically agree with the statement:

The responsibility of the electoral system is to ensure **effective **representation in government

but I think you are missing the effective part. Consider, an absolute pure democracy where every bill, item etc was voted on by everyone. That would certainly be the ultimate in democracy, but it would be a terrible way to run a country and likely lead to some insane policy choices. Similarly, an autocracy can pass perfect and brilliant legislation but is completely un democratic. So, we can see that there is give and take between full representation and effective government. My entire point is that PR, while really groovy on paper, tends to produce really bad outcomes and thus sacrifices a lot of the efficiency of government (and of voting frankly) for some (arguably temporary) democratic gain. I know too much about the to be anything but stridently opposed to PR.

I'll start the ball rolling:

The instant classics, Schitt's Creek and Kim's Convenience are there. Both are heartwarming, joyful family comedies. Blackberry is a great little movie about the Blackberry phone with Glenn Howerton (Dennis from it's always sunny in Philadelphia) and Jay Baruchel (Man Seeking Woman, basically that nerdy looking dude you'll recognize instantly.)

Ones I haven't seen but have heard really good things about (and are thus on my list):

The Marvelous Mrs Maisel, Reservation Dogs, Penny Dreadful, Britannia, Masters of Sex, Pen15

Haven't heard much but Natasha Lyonne is usually awesome, so Poker Face is on my list.

I've started listing a few CBC gem shows I'd like to watch (though I don't really watch much tv so it may take me some time.) Anyway, from my list there are a couple that might fit the bill:

Britannia - Trailer

Penny Dreadful Trailer

Please, anything but full PR. Please. In a polarized landscape PR is leading to increasingly bad outcomes (Israel, Germany, Austria, the Netherlands, Poland etc.) In a PR system, the Far Right would be running France.

This is not happening because the citizens of those countries are less good than Canadians.

Hi there, sorry for the delay!

I've never built a wiki, nor have any clue how to do it but I'll start looking into it and then circle back to the community seeking out feedback about organization/layout and any other design or UX stuff we should consider.

Edit: One other thing, do we have a way to automatically cross-post submissions to this community to say, !boycottus@lemmy.ca ? (This seems like a mod ability or some such?)

I would love for Ford to demand trump thank Canada for the electricity or he turns it off. (Not really but a man can dream, right?)

Love it, thank you!