Democracy means someone will always lose out but it also suggests the rule of the majority which can not happen in first past the post.
Though under our first past the post system there are more likely to be majorities enabling a single party to form a government, failing that a coalition is agreed to generate the majority

Under proportional representation systems it’s more likely that there isn’t a majority party and a greater need for coalitions
 
Democracy means someone will always lose out but it also suggests the rule of the majority which can not happen in first past the post.
If 50% plus 1 of the population vote for a party in FPTP it can be that a majority will rule.
FPTP benefits regional/independents, PR doesn't.
 
GBNEWS did a great summation of the duplicity of Blair over this

Saint Tony of Sedgefield?

Duplicitous?

Have you taken leave of your senses, man?

Before long you'll be telling everyone that this fine and principled man is no more than a manipulative, unprincipled, greedy, self-righteous stranger to the truth!!!

Whatever next?!?!?
 
Under proportional representation systems it’s more likely that there isn’t a majority party and a greater need for coalitions
It's received wisdom in England that coalition government is by definition A Bad Thing.


I'm decreasingly convinced of this, suspecting that other western democracies have made a pretty good fist of government by coalition, and that it would be helpful to study and learn from them. It makes it much harder for a majority to ride roughshod over the rights of a minority, for example.

Had that behaviour been left behind by the good folk of NI in the years between 1690 and 1969, this thread would have no raison d'etre.
 

Chef

LE
Those years are, by my arithmetic, between 1690 and 1969.

I fail to see your point.
I think @par avion was observing that prior to 1921 there was no Northern Ireland/Southern Ireland divide.

There was just Ireland.
 

Chef

LE
It's received wisdom in England that coalition government is by definition A Bad Thing.


I'm decreasingly convinced of this, suspecting that other western democracies have made a pretty good fist of government by coalition, and that it would be helpful to study and learn from them. It makes it much harder for a majority to ride roughshod over the rights of a minority, for example.

Had that behaviour been left behind by the good folk of NI in the years between 1690 and 1969, this thread would have no raison d'etre.
I think @par avion was observing that prior to 1921 there was no Northern Ireland/Southern Ireland divide.

There was just Ireland.
Why 1690-1969?

Until 1921 the good folk of NI were the same as the good folk of SI as there was only Ireland. Governed by Westminster. So you'd be more accurate asking for the good folk of Ireland to leave their behaviour behind.

The first coalition government in the UK was in 1852.

So your dates would more accurately reflect your ideas if they started from 1852.
 
I think it is possible only once in the past 100 years where a UK governing party has accumulated more than 50% of the vote.
So in the strict definition of 'democracy' as being governed by a majority of the whole eligible population the FPTP system rarely delivers.
However, if the debate is considered in terms of the percentage of eligible votes cast, the system also fails the test. The largest turnout in a general election was 83.9% recorded in 1950 - when Labour won 50.4% of the seats with only 46.1% of the votes cast (which equated to just 38% of the total eligible vote.
So it really doesn't matter how we do the arithmetic - 'democracy' is a bit of an unattainable utopia. Though in fairness, we in the UK, probably have the longest 'representative assembly' (parliament) in the world.
UK Share of the vote 1918 to 2019.jpg
Voter turnout 1918 to 2019.jpg
 
Top