undefined | Better HN

0 pointslotsofpulp7mo ago0 comments

> tyranny of the majority

Aka democracy.

> Elections would just switch from swing states to appealing to California and Texas if we did everything with purely popular votes.

No, it wouldn’t. It would switch to appealing to the most voters, who may or may not happen to live in California and Texas, but that is irrelevant to a democracy.

0 comments

johnnyanmac7mo ago

>Aka democracy.

Yes. I hope I don't need to explain the many times that the majority sentiment was in fact not the correct one. A pure democracy under the basis the US was founded under would end up much more conservative than what we have today.

> It would switch to appealing to the most voters.

So it'd switch to appealing to urban cities and ignore the rural areas. Iirc the top 10 cities today make up some 40+% of voters. Why bother going to Omaha when you can focus instead of LA and NYC?

twixfel7mo ago

Tyranny of the majority may be undesirable but tyranny of the minority is even worse. At least the majority, are, you know, the majority.

mlrtime7mo ago

You are taking a very narrow one sided view. We live in a Republic of states, not a Federal Democracy. I know you would like this to happen, but it won't here for good reasons.

lotsofpulpOP7mo ago

There is no “good” reason. It just so happens to be the way the power dynamics of the past have played out, and there has not yet been sufficient motivation for the population to go to war.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse