Author: Laurel L. Russwurm

is a self publishing novelist and photographer.

Comment on Canadian Dog Whistle Politics or #ProportionalRepresentation? by activist2014

A credible source, The Electoral Reform Knowledge Network (ACE), refers to the installation of MMP in Germany as an “External Imposition”. The same source also refers to some compromise. So, the premise of this blog seems like a fanciful splitting of hairs.1. https://aceproject.org/regions-en/countries-and-territories/DE/case-studies/germany-the-original-mixed-member-proportional-system 2. https://aceproject.org/main/english/es/esb03.htm

Winston Churchill stated on a number of occasions that, in general, he preferred proportional representation. I am not personally aware of any specific Churchill statements in respect of Germany, although he certainly may have done so..

From ACE:

” External Imposition

A small number of electoral systems were more consciously designed and imposed on nation states by external powers. Two of the most vivid examples of this phenomenon occurred in West Germany after the Second World War, and in Namibia in the late 1980s.

In post-war Germany, both the departing British forces and the German parties were anxious to introduce a system which would avoid the damaging party proliferation and destabilisation of the Weimar years, and to incorporate the Anglo tradition of constituency representation because of unease with the 1919-1933 closed list electoral system which denied the voters a choice between candidates as well as parties.

During 1946, elections in the French and American zones of occupation were held under the previous Weimar electoral system. In the British zone a compromise was adopted which allowed voters to vote for constituency members with a number of list PR seats reserved to compensate for any disproportionality that arose from the districts. Thus the Mixed-Member Proportional Representation (MMP) system, which has since been emulated by a number of other countries, was born. This mixed system was eventually adopted for all parliamentary elections in 1949 but it was not until 1953 that two separate votes were introduced, one for the constituency member, and another based on the Länder, which ultimately determined the party composition of the Bundestag. The imposition of a five percent national threshold for party list representation helped focus the party system on three major groupings after 1949 – the Social Democrats, Christian Democrats and Free Democrats – although in all a total of 12 parties gained representation in those first post-war national elections.

Comment on Canadian Dog Whistle Politics or #ProportionalRepresentation? by DAVID

If Trudeau has said NO to MMP then it’s time to explore alternative mixes of proportional representation and a majoritarian system. I’d like to proffer the Alternative Mixed Proportional system.

It’d have lots of 4-seat ridings and one at-large seat. The at-large seat would use the Alternative vote. The alternative vote would also be used for one out of each of the 4 seats in every riding. The other three seats would be determined with the simplest, purest proportional representation system possible s.t. there being only 3 seats: Largest Remainder with a Hare quota.

3-seat LR Hare is very similar to First Past the Post, which is 1-seat LR Hare. It has one vote per voter and one candidate per party. A common outcome would be for the top 3 parties/candidates to win one seat each. However the locally top party can win 2 seats if their candidate’s percent of the valid votes is 33.3% greater than the 3rd place candidate’s percent of the votes. In that case, the second seat would be held by a vice-candidate. It’s unlikely that a party would win 3 seats, as that would require for the top candidate to beat the 2nd place candidate by more than 66.67% of the vote.

Here’s some concrete examples:If the percents were 40:30:20:10 then the top 3 would win one seat each. If the percents were 50:35:10:5 then the top party would win 2 seats, since 50-10>33.3. If they were 80-10-8-2 then the top party would win 3 seats.

In Canada, AMP would give Trudeau/LP one-fourth plus of what they want and overall tend to let two outcomes happen if there is a dominant party: it’d either have a majority or it’d be the bigger party in a coalition. But to get the majority, it would need to win quite a few 2 out of 3 seats in a 3-seat LR Hare election and that would require them to be attentive to the issues of local minority groups, like First Nations people. This would not be as true if only the Alternative Vote were in use.

So no doubt Canada needs electoral reform, but there are true hybrid systems that are neither purely proportional nor purely majoritarian and it seems that is what you should focus on….

Nike Middle East on Twitter

Nike Middle East on Twitter:

Qasim Rashid, Esq. tweets:

Powerful Nike commercial featuring athletes who are exclusively Muslim women.

Islamaphobia is the stupid word the MSM chose to apply to fear of and discrimination & racism against Muslims.  Like any form of bigotry and racism, the misconceptions are based on ignorance.   Although there are many Muslims in Canada, like any immigrant population, they are concentrated in spots here and there.  A great many Canadians have not even seen a real live Muslim Canadian much less had a conversation with one.   Apparently this makes fear an easy sell.  

Here in Canada, apparently, we have dogwhistle politics, where politicians ride waves of fear to prominance.  MP Kellie Leitch is seeking leadership of the Conservative Party based on “Canadian Values” that bear no relation to the values embraced by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

The faulty justification for Islamaphobia is the belief that Islam represses women.  The reality is that this is no more true of Islam than it is of Judaism or Christianity.  

Seriously, is a woman willing to stand up to the Government of Canada because she doesn’t believe it has the right to require her to dress as it sees fit in need of protection? 

When Canada adopts Proportional Representation we will be well on the way to eliminating the polarization and dog whistle politics that come from our medieval First Past the Post voting system. 


Canadian Dog Whistle Politics or #ProportionalRepresentation?

  For those who don’t know, at the end of Second World War the victorious Allies governments imposed Mixed Member Proportional Representation on West Germany. They did this specifically to prevent the rise of another Hitler.   Although these powerful government leaders clearly understood this, they chose not to follow the same path for their own nations. Presumably they believed such limitation…

View On WordPress

Canadian Dog Whistle Politics or #ProportionalRepresentation?

 

quebec_conference_1943framed

For those who don’t know, at the end of Second World War the victorious Allies governments imposed Mixed Member Proportional Representation on West Germany.

They did this specifically to prevent the rise of another Hitler.   Although these powerful government leaders clearly understood this, they chose not to follow the same path for their own nations. Presumably they believed such limitation on their own power wasn’t necessary.   Just as Canada’s current Prime Minister doesn’t feel his power needs limitation.

Here’s the thing: it doesn’t matter if there is a good Prime Minister or a bad one.  It doesn’t matter if there’s a bad government in place or not.

What matters in a representative democracy is that voters secure representation in Parliament.  All Canadians need representation, period.  Just as Canadians need the Charter, in times of good or bad.   Like the Charter, representation provides citizens with security.

Had Harry Truman implemented such a change on the USA, the likelihood of a Trump presidency would be nil.

Had Prime Minister William Lyon MacKenzie King implemented some form of Proportional Representation in Canada, Canadians would not see be seeing a rise in dog whistle politics. My brother wrote about this phenomenon before either of us knew the term.

Winston Churchill knew Proportional Representation was a defence against fascism.

Here’s the thing: fear and dog whistle politics are a powerful tools used over and over again in winner-take-all systems because they work.  One of the things so dreadfully wrong with winner-take-all politics is that the governments we elect are so unaccountable to voters, it isn’t a question of whether they will keep all their promises, it is a question of which promises they will keep.  And, incredibly, we accept that.  We have been conditioned to understand they won’t.  No doubt this is a major reason the young and the idealistic don’t engage in politics: they see it for a sham, and choose to invest their energies elasewhere.

Dog Whistling Islamaphobia

MP Iqra Khalid’s Private Member’s Motion is not the first to reference House of Commons e-petition (e-411).

The Canadian MSM is now reminding us that all the MPs in Parliament — including those Conservative Leadership Candidates seeking to ride a wave of prejudice to 100% power in Parliament — voted in support of Mr. Mulcair’s October Petition.  This was long before 6 Quebec Muslims were murdered at prayer.

Mr. Speaker, following discussions with all parties in the House, I hope you will find consent for the following motion. I move:

That the House join the 69,742 Canadian supporters of House of Commons e-petition (e-411) in condemning all forms of Islamophobia.

— The Honourable Thomas Mulcair, Hansard, House of Commons, October 26th, 2016

NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair's Islamaphobia motion received unanimous assent in the House of Commons on Oct. 26, 2016
NDP Leader Thomas Mulcair’s Islamaphobia motion received unanimous assent in the House of Commons on Oct. 26, 2016

So what has happened?  Do these Conservative Leadership Candidates feel a majority of their constituents approve of gunning down Muslims at prayer?

I don’t believe that for a minute.  But our winner-take-all political system allows for the distribution of a disproportional amount of power.  Ms. Leitch doesn’t need a majority of Conservative Party Members to support Islamaphobia in order to win her party’s leadership crown, or even a majority of voters to become the Prime Minister of Canada.  So long as we continue to use this First Past the Post Electoral System, the right dog whistle can win a 39% (or less) majority.

It doesn’t matter if we have a few women or minority MPs in the House of Commons.  We are staring in the face of the polarization inherent in FPTP.  The example before starkly contrasts what happens when a powerful old white male MP puts forward a Motion condemning Islamaphobia with what happens when a young ethnic woman MP does.  And it is a not pretty picture.  But it happens. And it will keep on happening so long as we retain an electoral system that rewards dog whistle politicians with more than their fair share of power.

Canada needs real Real Change.

But it doesn’t have to be this way.  In spite of his totally specious arguments to the contrary, Prime Minister Trudeau’s disavowal of his electoral reform promise not only paves the way for institutional racism, it fuels Islamaphobia.  If Ms. Khalid (and other Liberal MPs) want to change this dreadful FPTP side effect, it is time they told their leader he must restore the Electoral Reform process and get the legislation through Parliament by October.  Because if Canada wants to be a healthy multicultural democracy, we must have Proportional Representation.

Now.

Sign The Electoral Reform Petition

At this time of writing, Petition e-616 is up to 120,651 signatures. If everyone who has already signed it can convince 2 Canadians to sign it our chance of having Proportional Representation implemented by 2019 will be greatly improved.