Proportional Representation (was Re: Video Victorianism)

Paul Henry Rosenberg rad at
Fri Oct 9 12:56:03 PDT 1998

Enrique Diaz-Alvarez wrote:

> Paul Henry Rosenberg wrote:
> >
> > (1) CAMPAIGN FINANCE REFORM, THAT'S WHAT! How many times do I have to
> > say this, just because I think that proportional representation is VITAL
> > does NOT mean that I'm a narrow-minded zealot who thinks it will
> > single-handedly solve all problems. It won't. It's not a breath mint
> > or a candy mint.
> >
> We've had this discussion before, and I apologize for logging off back
> then due to lack of time. I think this is the key issue. In fact, I
> think that the proportional vs. FPTP debate is a distraction. I agree
> with boddishatva that changing to proportional, by itself, will do
> nothing to solve the overrepresentation of the right in US elected
> bodies.
> And 'campaign finance reform' is a euphemism. Even if it were possible
> to restrict the open buying and selling of politicians, this will not
> prevent moneyed interests from controlling political debate through the
> media. Nothing less than severe restrictions on broadcast political
> speech will do, I think.

Well, I'm for the wholesale denial of broadcast licenses to all current commercial license holders, for manifest failure to serve the public interest, so I've got you beat by an order of magnitude.

I wish people would respond to what I've written rather than straw man and red herring me to death.

But I guess that's the only way to keep a lefter-than-thou act going in cyberspace.

BTW, Paula, it came thru in blu

-- Paul Rosenberg Reason and Democracy rad at

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

More information about the lbo-talk mailing list