Proportional Representation (Was Re: la revolution)

[Paul Henry Rosenberg]

james withrow wrote:
> 
>      I'm for proportional representation, too....
> ...
> ....But let's not fool ourselves into thinking that the
> outcome will be what everyone on this list will want to see...
>...
> ....If the political party structure really approximated
> what polling data indicates that Americans want, we'd
> have at least four parties:
> 1) a Liberal party of leftist social positions and
> laissez-faire economics.
> 2) a Right-wing party pursuing a reactionary economic
> AND social agenda
> 3) a Leftist party of progressives on all issues
> and 4) a pro-labor party which would, at best, be indifferent to
> progressive social issues and, at worst, hostile to them.

Back in 1992, this might have seemed like a pretty bleak prospect.  But
nowadays it seems positively like a breath of fresh air.

BTW, Proportional representation emerged as a reform measure in a number
of cities between the World Wars.  It was done away with in NYC as part
of the pre-McCarthy phase of the red scare, on the grounds that it
allowed Communists to be elected to the NYC city counsel.  (Guess who!)

Reason enough to give more serious thought to fighting for it.

-- 
Paul Rosenberg
Reason and Democracy
rad at gte.net

 
"Let's put the information BACK into the information age!"