Thursday, February 11, 2016


"In Defence of Single-Member Plurality" (footnotes removed):
 "Parties evolved in our system so that the House of Commons could support a government. The proponents of proportional representation have got it all backwards: parliament does not exist in order to serve parties; instead, it exists in order to support a government that can carry out the Queen’s business. Unlike the horseshoe-shaped consensus parliaments of Continental European, which reformers here exalt, our House of Commons consists of two sides; to the Speaker’s right sits the Ministry and government backbenchers, and to his left sits the opposition, the largest party of which acts as the government-in-waiting. As Peter Hitchens argues:

    The electoral system is not there for the good of the parties, but for the good of the country.It has two irreplaceable and unique characteristics. The first is that it provides strong government, constantly challenged by a vigilant and ambitious opposition.The next is that it allows the people, when enraged or otherwise disappointed by a bad government, to turn it out completely.

In short, single-member plurality is for the good of the country; the  in contrast, proportional systems serve political parties themselves, particularly small irrelevant parties like the Greens which exist only in the hope of achieving what Pepall calls a grossly disproportionate “imbalance of power” in hung parliaments by suspending itself like the Sword of Damocles over the government’s head and extorting absurd demands from it in order to cater to the narrowest slices of the electorate. Under mixed-member proportional, we could no longer say that we elect members of parliament alone; instead, with one ballot, we would elect some members, and on another we would elect parties instead, but not the lists that determine the order in which parties fill up their quotas or the proportional seats distributed in order to match their share of seats with their seat of the popular vote. Proportional representation — whether pure or mixed-member proportional — springs from the false and presumed premise that the House of Commons exists to support parties, when in fact parties evolved in order to support ministries that could successfully carry out the Queen’s business and sustain their parliamentary majorities.  Political parties aggregate interests and exist in order to form government, and being in government is about taking responsibility for acts of the Crown and making decisions. Governing is about making decisions to the exclusive of all others; it is not about making multiple decisions in proportion to the share of votes that different parties and their platforms won in the previous general election. Ultimately, this is why the people as a whole — the constituent body of the realm — will invariably be unhappy or dissatisfied with what the government of the day does. As Pepall says, “to govern is to choose.”"

It is nothing short of staggering that this voting reform movement in Canada occurs at exactly the same time that we have before us a spectacular exhibition in Europe of the systematic weaknesses of various alternatives to 'first past the post'.

"Immigrant Crisis: Facts, Myth or Plot?" Europe will survive the refugees, but can it survive the fascism?

"What US Congress Researchers Reveal About Washington’s Designs on Syria" by Stephen Gowans.

"Trudeau’s ISIS policy gets an assist from Obama—and Harper":
"One possible interpretation, which I suspect you will find represented in the comment section below this post soon enough, is that the Obama crowd are so thoroughly unable to find their own hindquarters with a map and a flashlight that they don’t even know when they have been hung out to dry by quislings."
We're reached Peak Satire, the point where the headlines of the Jew-controlled mainstream media are identical to the headlines of the Jew-controlled satirical media: "Syrian Opposition Groups Sense U.S. Support Fading"

"Routine Proceedings" An excellent blog on the minutiae of Canadian Parliamentary politics, including a detailed description, complete with fashion notes (!), of each Question Period (both main opposition parties in Canada are currently completely incapable of asking useful questions).

"This Is How Hillary Clinton Gets the Coverage She Wants":  'muscular'. indeed.

"Now we are One…":
"We take it as an achievement that the Guardian has recently made it clear it will ban people from commenting if they link to OffG, because we make – in their own words – “statements of fact regarding our journalists credibility.”"

"Jiantao Culture & Flint Water Crisis: Why Not Use Chinese Methods?"  Shoot the politicians and bureaucrats involved and send their families bills for the bullets.

"Sirhan Sirhan, Robert Kennedy's killer, is denied parole a 15th time"  Needless to say, the fact that it was physically and geometrically - I'd like to say trajectorially - impossible for him to have done the crime for which he is in jail does not enter into the deliberations.  "RFK Friend to Raise Doubts About Sirhan Guilt at Parole Hearing".  The authorities are sheepish about it:  "Why New Ban on Televising Sirhan Parole Hearing?".  "'The girl in the polka dot dress'".
blog comments powered by Disqus