-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
PoliGAF 2017 |OT6| Made this thread during Harvey because the ratings would be higher
- Thread starter Aaron Strife
- Start date
- Status
whyamihere
Banned
I do NOT buy this.
Aaron Strife
Banned
I don't either. Even if that's true now, it almost certainly wouldn't be true in the voting booth.
Dominican Power
Member
I bet Trump is loving all this hurricane coverage.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
Hmmm.
Mark Andrew
Member
Yeah, his approval has skyrocketed to high-30s
Rephrase your tweet for fuck's sake. What does this even mean
whyamihere
Banned
oOooooh.
God fucking dammit
Caption?
"Hail Hydra"
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
can someone familiar with Nordic politics tell me what the Centre Parties do other than like, protect farm subsidies or something?
They work on protecting ancient Nordic traditions like the law that allows you to beat Swedish people with a stick if they come across the ice to Norway.
ShadowSwordmaster
Banned
These two people are pathetic.
whyamihere
Banned
lol
Yes. Thank you. Good-bye. Mr. President.
whyamihere
Banned
oooooh.
NYCmetsfan
Banned
goddamnit
TiredofWinning
Member
Jeff Merkley is visiting Iowa YAAAAAASSSSSSSS
whyamihere
Banned
maybe he can raise his voice above a whisper.
TiredofWinning
Member
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/st...iowa-caucuses-progressive-policies/650552001/
He seemed pretty good in that clip
Best/only chance for left wing coalition occurs if Venstre ends up under the electoral threshold 4%, at which point they would go from ~7 seats to 2.They currently sit at 4,1%.
Only problem is that I'm not sure that the math would necessarily favour the left in the distribution of those seats Venstre would lose though. Then again I'm not fully tuned in to the arcane election math of Norway.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Because I don't have an "issue" with hierarchy so much as I believe it to be an inescapable part of the human condition, and as such a system that relies on the abolition of such merits extra skepticism.
whyamihere
Banned
Yeah, that's what Lysbakken just said, which is fair. Still 25% of the vote to count and even a small shift at the margin could put them below 4%. We'll see.
omg
https://www.thelocal.no/20170911/join-the-local-for-live-coverage-of-the-norwegian-general-election
HIGH DRAMA
A significant amount of the outstanding vote is Oslo where Venstre are strong (it's their strongest region), which is why I wouldn't get so excited.
balladofwindfishes
Member
This is nothing you need to care about or worry about at all
Fenderputty
Banned
Dude. Why do you do this to yourself?
whyamihere
Banned
sad.
It can be both an inescapable part of the human condition and a bad thing that we should make an effort to suppress and fight. There are lots of those!
I don't think it's correct to say that socialism relies on the abolition of hierarchy. It instead recognizes the toxicity of hierarchy and makes an effort to create mechanisms to suppress it whenever possible.
Ultimately human nature is pretty malleable so I don't think I really agree that hierarchy is inescapable. Humans existed for a long time in societies that didn't contain significant hierarchies. How do you think that is possible?
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
This is like what asking a calculator does aside from calculating.
Poodlestrike
Banned
Pre-hierarchal human societies were generally small and simple enough to make simple consensus decision making practical. If we accept hierarchies as the end-product of bringing large groups of people together and issuing them complex tasks, then I have to be skeptical about a society built on the idea that nobody's going to be above anybody else.
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
is there entire political platform like "eh whatever" until you get to farm subsidies?
I guess uh, the Netherlands has that 50+ party whose whole purpose is to protect pensions.
The Technomancer
card-carrying scientician
I largely agree with this, which is why the ostensible circular accountability of democracy is important and finding more ways to mitigate the adverse effects is important
I think this should be a bigger concern than Graham/Cassidy (but I'm still keeping an eye on Graham/Cassidy.)
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
Highly proportional electoral systems tend to result in a lot of parties with one or two priorities, who then form coalitions with partners they're willing to tolerate. In majoritarian systems, this happens before the elections, creating parties that care about multiple issues.
whyamihere
Banned
As of now...
https://www.thelocal.no/20170911/join-the-local-for-live-coverage-of-the-norwegian-general-election
Christian Democrats and Liberals right on the precipice.
https://www.thelocal.no/20170911/join-the-local-for-live-coverage-of-the-norwegian-general-election
Christian Democrats and Liberals right on the precipice.
Low energy
"Hierarchies tend to form when humans try to organize to accomplish complex tasks" is not really the same as "hierarchies are an inescapable part of human nature," though. For example, maybe hierarchies are a result of trying to correctly distribute limited resources that are necessary for survival. This would suggest that as our ability to produce subsistence goods improves our need for hierarchy is reduced.
Also, uh, isn't this an argument for monarchy as being more honest than democratic oligarchy?
Bonen no Max'd
Banned
The party system within PR I'm most familiar with is Germany's, where all the represented parties all have fairly coherent ideological stances (Christian democracy, liberalism, right-wing populism, social democracy, green politics, and socialism) so I assumed that was generally true for other countries with PR, but interesting. Is the difference the proportion threshold? Norway's and Germany's are only 1% different.
Here's a fun paper about how no-platforming on Reddit reduced the amount of hate speech on the platform.
http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf
http://comp.social.gatech.edu/papers/cscw18-chand-hate.pdf
I think the economics of Bolshevism could be done without the human rights monstrosities, but you'd still be left with a mediocre system that simply couldn't address the rise of consumer products. The Soviet Union only lasted to the fringes of the information age, but you could already see that they were dealing with it poorly (their own military was smuggling in arcade machines from Japan to gut for integrated circuits instead of relying on homemade silicon-tech).
We've got a good system, just need to fairly share the fruits of capital.
Poodlestrike
Banned
I don't think so? That there are hierarchies doesn't necessarily lend itself to "let's put one asshole in charge and his kids too because why not."
Anyway, I'm not sure there's a difference between "things people always do when presented with a universal set of conditions" and "things that are an inescapable part of human nature." It's not just substinence goods, though it might be if you were to broaden the definition of "substinence." Complex tasks encourage specialties, specialties are of unequal value under changing sets of circumstances, unequally valued skillsets leads to hierarchy, ergo, complex tasks leads to hierarchy. Our challenges going forward are going to require more complexity, not less, so here we sit.
Socialism is saying "lets get rid of hierarchies." I think this is admirable, but not actually doable. Capitalism is "here's how things have arranged themselves." This isn't admirable, but it is what's happened, so trying to fix it makes more sense to me than trying to switch gears to a thing that doesn't look to me like it would even work out.
D
Deleted member 231381
Unconfirmed Member
No, it's the MMP part. MMP tends to introduce a 'contamination effect'. People tend to identify with parties, it isn't a purely rational choice decision, and your vote is a representation of your in-group and identity as much as it is the party whose policy base you are nearest to. As a result, most people don't split votes, they vote for the same party at every level. Because Germany still has FPTP districts, which are then topped up to be proportional, parties that do well at FPTP stage have a psychological attraction to them in the proportional part, so MMP tends to produce less parties than list PR does. You can see the same effect in New Zealand, which also has less parties than comparable list systems.
These things actually obey surprisingly regular mathematical rules. For example, the number of parties in a list PR system is usually approximately equal to the geometric mean of the possibilities. Given the threshold in Norway is 4%, the maximum number of parties that can win is 24 (since you can't have 25 parties all of whom exceed 4%). The minimum is 1. The geometric mean of (1, 2, 3, ..., 24) is 9.8. Norway has 9 parties who will hold seats! Not bad, right?
Oh hey I missed this.
Not all centre parties are created equal;
The Swedish one has taken a liberal turn and is less focused on agrarian issues. It's essentially our Liberal party (not to be confused with the actual Liberal party which is more conservative). Very pro-EU
The Finnish one is a bit weird since they aren't as focused on an economic model as other parties, but they do support a market based economy. They are more socially conservative compared to the Swedish and Norwegian one.
The Norwegian one... idk man, they've said some nationalist things lately, they are anti-EU, but they still work with the Left wing coalition.
What they have in common is an emphasis on decentralisation and environmental issues.
(and also a spotty history when it comes to WWII and whether or not they viewed Hitler as bad)
Christian Democrats are probably in more trouble, unless I'm off with where the outstanding vote is (and I very well could be). Still not sure if it's enough for either to drop under 4%.
whyamihere
Banned
Yup. Christian Democrats were at 4.3, now at 4.2, Center was at 4.1 and now at 4.2. Might not be enough but we'll see.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked
- Locked