AlolanVulpix

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.

I mean, we live in a democratic society, so free speech is encouraged.

Edit: also if there were a hypothetical system superior to proportional representation, I'd be in favour of it after rigorous consideration. I'm not bound to any particular 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

How is that a "bad outcome" when it's literally what people voted for. Electoral systems are not supposed to decide the ideological makeup of government.

It's not PR you are against, you are against a characteristic inherent of democracy itself.

has made the other parties form really broad and thus ineffective coalitions, which are unable to push forward significant legislation

Is this worse than the big tent parties we have now, that members can't vote or think independent of their party leaders?

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

What does this have anything to do with our conversation? We aren't discussing representative democracy versus direct democracy. We are discussing proportional representation vs non-proportional representation.

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

1. Tends to produce bad outcomes how exactly? You would need to describe an outcome that you would not see under any democracy.
2. Sacrifices the efficiency of government how? And is "efficiency" more important than policy that the majority actually agree on?
3. Your argument against PR is that voting is "inefficient", therefore we should allow non-proportional governments?
4. How is it "temporary" democratic gain, when there are more mathematical criteria satisfied under PR systems for producing democratic systems?

Anything less than full PR is less than an ideal representative democracy.

Besides, electoral systems are not supposed to determine the ideological makeup of government. The responsibility of the electoral system is to ensure effective representation in government, that's it.

If you don't like the ideological makeup of those countries you mentioned, blame the culture, not the electoral system.

There was a point where Democracy didn’t exist, and it wasn’t that long ago

Yeah, back when democracy didn't exist, humanity lived in misery compared to today's living standards.

We can do better than our less intelligent ancestors can’t we? Especially when we all agree generally that the systems we have aren’t working.

Yeah, the better system is called proportional representation.

political parties from the system wholly impractical

Believe it or not, there is no part of our FPTP electoral system entrenches that political parties in the first place. I know you might not like it, but it's factually the truth. They organically come about because people, it's the most efficient way to organize.

otherwise do not waste further time responding with wikipedia links you clearly do not understand.

You are a very angry person, lol. But regardless, Duverger's law is the reason we have a "two party" system.

There isn't a modern democracy in the world that doesn't have political parties. And for good reason, it's wholly impractical. Even single party states such as China have political parties...

The reason we have two major parties is described in Duverger's law. You don't have to think I'm right or wrong, because this is just the reality.

But proportional representation does not require political parties to be a part of the electoral system.

See single transferable vote (STV): A Simple Guide to Electoral Systems. It's still a work in progress, but lays out a good framework for discussing electoral systems.

And for letting us down on proportional representation: !fairvote@lemmy.ca

Some additional restrictions on mods: must be registered on a Canadian owned and operated lemmy instance.

We've been growing at about ~10 new subscribers for the past week. The fair vote movement is truly alive and growing!

We will get proportional representation one day -- we are deserving and entitled to representation!

But we can't do it alone, please spread the word!

Potential Goals:

1. Enforce posting standards such as language labelling on new posts (but perhaps not comments). We want to be a bilingual community, supporting both anglophones and francophones.
2. At least 1 post for each official language per week.
3. ~~Growth of >= 1 subscriber per day in 2025. Possibly monetary incentive, for example, if there's +1 local subscriber -> $1 (and $0.90 for subscribers otherwise) for Fair Vote Canada~~. Have users/month and subscribers be at least >= 3.5% of !canada@lemmy.ca.
4. Diversifying supply of sources. While Fair Vote Canada is an easy choice, we should seek exposure to other movements such as the Charter Challenge for Fair Voting or Apathy is Boring.
5. Self-sustaining community. Currently, it's mostly moderators that are posting. But we are people too...

Thank you for your encouragement!

Thanks for your feedback! I was unaware 'all' was a mean to find this fairvote community.

Overall, I agree, but in the meanwhile, we should make a conscious and concerted effort towards a goal.

A sort of sub task leading up to the goal of proportional representation.

Increasing the subscriber count helps towards that (at least in my opinion).