多数表决--批判 优先决策--替代方案

Peter Emerson
{"title":"多数表决--批判 优先决策--替代方案","authors":"Peter Emerson","doi":"10.5539/jpl.v17n1p47","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"The basis of western democracy is the almost universal belief that controversies shall be resolved by the will of a majority. And quite right too. Unfortunately, this leads many to take decisions by a majority vote, with proposed amendments and then the motion itself all approved or rejected in simple yes-or-no ballots. Other more accurate voting systems have long since been devised, and yet binary voting prevails, not only in democracies, but also in theocracies and autocracies; it is ubiquitous, in politics, business and law. Accordingly, this article analyses its weaknesses, discusses its origins, relates a little history, and refers to some of its worst consequences. It then goes on to describe a non-majoritarian methodology, to compare majority voting to other decision-making voting procedures, and finally to talk of a world where the words ‘majority’, ‘minority’ and ‘veto’ may fade from the political lexicon.","PeriodicalId":90619,"journal":{"name":"Journal of politics and law","volume":"55 26","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Majority Voting – A Critique Preferential Decision-Making – An Alternative\",\"authors\":\"Peter Emerson\",\"doi\":\"10.5539/jpl.v17n1p47\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"The basis of western democracy is the almost universal belief that controversies shall be resolved by the will of a majority. And quite right too. Unfortunately, this leads many to take decisions by a majority vote, with proposed amendments and then the motion itself all approved or rejected in simple yes-or-no ballots. Other more accurate voting systems have long since been devised, and yet binary voting prevails, not only in democracies, but also in theocracies and autocracies; it is ubiquitous, in politics, business and law. Accordingly, this article analyses its weaknesses, discusses its origins, relates a little history, and refers to some of its worst consequences. It then goes on to describe a non-majoritarian methodology, to compare majority voting to other decision-making voting procedures, and finally to talk of a world where the words ‘majority’, ‘minority’ and ‘veto’ may fade from the political lexicon.\",\"PeriodicalId\":90619,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of politics and law\",\"volume\":\"55 26\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-02-16\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of politics and law\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v17n1p47\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of politics and law","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5539/jpl.v17n1p47","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

西方民主制度的基础是,人们几乎普遍认为争议应由多数人的意愿来解决。这也是非常正确的。不幸的是,这导致许多人以多数票来做出决定,提出的修正案和议案本身都以简单的 "是 "或 "否 "来通过或否决。人们早就设计出了其他更精确的投票系统,但二元制投票不仅在民主政体中盛行,在神权政体和专制政体中也同样盛行;在政治、商业和法律领域,二元制投票无处不在。因此,本文分析了二元投票制的弱点,讨论了它的起源,讲述了一些历史,并提到了它的一些最坏后果。然后,文章描述了一种非多数表决方法,将多数表决与其他决策表决程序进行了比较,最后谈到了一个 "多数"、"少数 "和 "否决 "这些词可能会从政治词汇中消失的世界。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Majority Voting – A Critique Preferential Decision-Making – An Alternative
The basis of western democracy is the almost universal belief that controversies shall be resolved by the will of a majority. And quite right too. Unfortunately, this leads many to take decisions by a majority vote, with proposed amendments and then the motion itself all approved or rejected in simple yes-or-no ballots. Other more accurate voting systems have long since been devised, and yet binary voting prevails, not only in democracies, but also in theocracies and autocracies; it is ubiquitous, in politics, business and law. Accordingly, this article analyses its weaknesses, discusses its origins, relates a little history, and refers to some of its worst consequences. It then goes on to describe a non-majoritarian methodology, to compare majority voting to other decision-making voting procedures, and finally to talk of a world where the words ‘majority’, ‘minority’ and ‘veto’ may fade from the political lexicon.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信